"They’re dirty and dangerous, unwieldy and expensive, antiquated and so very analog." This is what the banks is pushing, though that is not the real reasons.
The real reasons why banks wants to remove cash:
"However, there are other reasons that central banks are so eager to eliminate cash right now. Most importantly, the crisis in the financial system. Central banks have tried since 2009 to kick off the economy by keeping something close to zero interest rates. It did not succeed. Several banks have now in reality introduced a negative interest rate. With negative interest punished you for having money in the bank. Negative interest rate is therefore a strong incentive to take money out of the bank and "put them in the mattress." For banks they would be disastrous for bank customers should do this, especially if it happens in a short time and in mass scale. And it may well do, if banks are introducing even more negative interest rates and customers get the feeling that their money be ground down the drain.
If it is forbidden to have cash, banks may however introduce so negative interest rates they want. Then will no longer customers could try to save their money by taking them out. Then they have only two choices: either to spend the money or letting banks reduce their value.
Banks also want to be able to supply their customers' savings accounts if they themselves were coming in crisis. This happened with Banca Etruria in Italy. There were small depositors funds confiscated to save the bank from bankruptcy.
From 1 January 2016 enters EU banking Directive (BRRD - Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive) in force. Following this directive, so-called "bail in" regulations apply. These were the rules that were used for Banca Etruria and three other financial institutions in Italy and their clients now have been noticing this in practice.
If (read once) cash abolished customers will be totally at the mercy of the banks, which in turn will be able to so-called Valter with customers' money as they want, without risking "bank run" or other similar inconveniences.
So the next banking crisis becomes a giant oil."
"There are also other, more political arguments. Bentestuen talked about control, and there is a very real argument. If all buying and selling is digital, any financial transaction could be traced and logged. This means that banks and intelligence agencies will have a total overview of all citizens are doing on the economic side. All purchases and sales, all gifts and contributions, everything. Not only who and what, but also when and where. This is a grip himself George Orwell had tankt when he wrote in 1984.
Some say: "Is it a big deal then, I have then nothing to hide." The answer include: What do you know about it? What do you know about what the government, banks or others will use against you tomorrow or in ten years? And not least, what do you know about who will know this and use it? There is no guarantee that the government will have good intentions. If they think you are a troublesome person, can they not only block your account. You will not buy a loaf of bread once.
And it is not certain that it is only the government that will monitor everything you do. The data on your buying and selling, your gifts and small or large economic pranks are worth gold for monopolies. You and your consumption is a commodity bought and sold for large sums of money on the market. When they know everything about you, they can target the psychological impact and advertising in ways that we find it hard to imagine. (Apple will sell your feelings.) This is currently being done. Marketing Company profiles households from consumption profile, and can therefore say a lot about how the individual person and the individual household will behave on the market."
About the BRRD:
freshfields.com/uploadedFiles/SiteWide/News_Room/Insight/RRP/EU Directive key points.pdf