This heading paraphrases words attributed to Mark Twain when his obituary was published while he was still alive. They seem strangely apt right now when it comes to cash.
How is it that we write long articles and run conferences about the challenges that ‘less-cash’ bring (maintaining cash cycle infrastructure, resilience, financial inclusion etc.) and understanding the ‘cash paradox’ (rising cash in circulation volumes when cash usage is declining), when banknote printing presses around the world are flat out, central banks and printers are investing in cash production and distribution left, right and centre, and the industry around the circulation of cash (cash management companies, ATM providers etc) is booming?
How can both be true? What is going on?
Data on cash use at the point of sale (POS) suggests that it is in decline as a percentage of all payments. As examples, in the Netherlands cash was used for 22% of transactions in 2024, 10% in Sweden in 2025 and 9% in the UK. For South Africa, Mexico and Vietnam the corresponding figures for 2023 were 35%, 39%, and 38%.
Part of this story is, no doubt, due to the explosion in digital payments which means cash is used relatively less rather than in absolute numbers.
The Federal Reserve’s payment diary, for example, shows that the number of weekly payments made in cash has not changed since 2020.
So, how does this explain the figures recently presented by De La Rue at the High Security Printing conference in Asia, where the average increase in the volume of cash in circulation globally over the last five years has been 5.5% per year?
Cash in circulation is generally agreed to be driven by key factors such as growth in population and inflation. Globally these have increased by 3.1%, 1%, and 4% respectively. If one looks at the developing world, where banknote usage remains strong, the GDP growth rates are even higher. Africa’s GDP growth in 2025 was 4.2% and Asia’s 4.5%. In contrast Europe’s was 1.2% and the US 1.8%.
The focus on and fascination with digital payments has masked the fact that – whether for transactions in some parts of the world or for storing value in others – cash is still doing just fine. It may comprise a smaller share of the metaphorical payments pie, but that pie is growing. So in real, ie. volume, terms (which is the metric that matters most in our industry), cash continues to grow.
There are six private and 53 state printing works (SPW). Currently a third of them are investing in new capacity or capability. A banknote printing line will last for 20-30 years.
Added to this, a number of countries are investing in high security print capability for passports and other government documents that could be extended to include banknotes down the line – among them Ethiopia, Kyrgyzstan, Nepal, Saudi Arabia and Uganda.
Moreover, a number of central banks have invested, or are investing, in new cash centres (Angola, Belgium, Egypt, the Federal Reserve, Netherlands, Rwanda, Switzerland, Sweden, Thailand, to name a few), whilst expansion of or new substrate production facilities are also being undertaken.
Clearly, the industry thinks there is enough demand now, and for the lifetime of these investments, to justify them. But are they right?
Banknote orders do not follow issue volumes for a variety of reasons.
For example:
The impact of unexpected increases in production orders can cause central banks to have to get additional orders printed, whether they have an SPW or not.
This is known as ‘overspill’ in the industry. To our knowledge, there are at least two major countries with large volume requirements that are mopping up any spare capacity in the commercial sector.
Overspill orders tend to be large and take up the spare capacity in the printing community, taking away much of the commercial pressure on printers and generating funds for investment. A potential downside of overspill orders is that if they are sustained over a number of years, for example at the time of the break-up of the Soviet Union, the industry will invest in capacity without regard to long term volume requirements, leading to future problems.
New production equipment is, invariably, more productive than earlier versions, increasing capacity even when equipment is only being replaced or upgraded.
30 years ago, a banknote printing ‘line’, needing about six different production processes plus finishing equipment, produced 1 billion notes a shift. Today it will produce up to 1.4 billion banknotes a year on a one shift basis, enough cotton banknotes for a population 50-55 million people depending on usage.
In 2025 the ECB ordered 3.4 billion banknotes for the roughly 360 million people in the Eurosystem member states. The Federal Reserve ordered 5.8 billion in 2024 for its 342 million people. India produced 30.3 billion notes for 2024-25 for its 1.46 billion people.
Investment for new or better capabilities is a straightforward business decision; the need is either there or not.
Investment to be able to produce your own currency, a sovereignty decision, is a political decision, which makes sense so long as there is realism about the cost.
However, investing for the long term is difficult in less-cash regions such as Europe and North America, particularly if the country has adopted polymer as a substrate.
Vietnam, which is not a less-cash country, has adopted polymer and seen their banknote volume requirement fall sharply.
Equally, justifying investment on the basis that you will start exporting to fill capacity seems unwise when you consider the number of banknote printing works that already exist.
Clearly cash is alive and well.
Importantly it is going to be a widely used, at volume product for many decades to come.
Will it tail off? Yes. Will it tail off ‘fast’? No.
In the meantime 2025 has ended on a high for the banknote community, and – with order books full for most companies – this will continue for the next 12-18 months. On that note, we would like to wish all our readers the very best for the festive season and continuing good fortune in 2026.
