State agencies (existing): generally; acceptance of cash payments; require. Amends 1984 PA 431 (MCL 18.1101 - 18.1594) by adding sec. 427.
Summary
House Bill 5340 would amend the Management and Budget Act to require Michigan state agencies that accept payments from the public to accept cash as a payment option whenever they accept any other form of payment. The bill also prohibits state agencies from charging an extra fee for paying in cash. In practical terms, the measure is aimed at ensuring that residents can continue to use physical currency when paying state agencies for fees, services, or other obligations.
The bill is narrow in scope and does not change how private businesses operate; it applies only to state agencies. It would add a new section to 1984 PA 431, creating a statewide rule for agency payment policies and limiting agencies’ ability to move toward cashless payment systems for covered transactions.
Impact
HB 5340 would add section 427 to the Management and Budget Act, creating a statutory requirement that state agencies accepting payments must also accept cash and may not impose a surcharge for cash transactions. This would affect agency billing and payment procedures across state government, potentially requiring updates to administrative policies, cashier systems, and vendor arrangements. The bill would not alter tax rates or benefit eligibility, but it would constrain agency discretion over payment methods and protect cash-paying residents from additional costs.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill received generally favorable treatment in the House, advancing out of committee 4-0 and later passing third reading by a substantial margin of 77-27 with immediate effect. That pattern indicates broad support for the underlying policy of preserving cash as a payment option, though not unanimous support. No committee transcripts were provided, so there is no recorded debate language to indicate detailed arguments, but the vote totals suggest the bill was viewed positively by many members.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance between government efficiency and public access. Supporters would favor cash acceptance as a consumer-access and equity measure, especially for residents who are unbanked, underbanked, or prefer not to use electronic payments. Opponents may object to the operational burden on agencies, including handling costs, security concerns, accounting complexity, and the possibility that cashless systems are more efficient. The 77-27 House vote shows that while the bill had clear support, a meaningful minority remained opposed.