Is cash still king?

I am a financial investigations manager in the Eastern Region Special Operations Unit (ERSOU). Since 2012, I have gained extensive experience in the asset recovery field. I've also worked in similar roles in the National Investigation Service, HM Prison Service, Kent Police and the Crown Prosecution Service. I am currently secretary to the National Financial Investigators working group. I undertook a master’s degree in financial investigation at the University of Central Lancashire due to the passion I have for this work and asset recovery.  

A large motivating factor for undertaking this master’s was that financial investigation remains underused. This is despite its potential across a wide range of criminal investigations to disrupt crime. Its reach is far broader than the number and value of assets recovered from criminals. I hoped that the research would show that the importance of cash to criminals has not diminished, and this area should continue to be a focus for law enforcement and academics. 

It is important to note that the research, on which this article is founded, was undertaken in 2022 and that financial investigation and asset recovery is an ever-changing landscape.    

Introduction 

Cash, as both an enabler and result of criminal activity, has been widely recognised by law enforcement as a crucial part of criminal activity and criminal investigations. Criminals, like the rest of us, have access to a wide range of financial systems that have completely changed the way society uses money. In 2015, a report from Europol titled ‘Why is cash still king?’ (Europol, 2015) identified the prevalence of the criminal use of cash.

Since the publication of this report, the prominence of cryptocurrency and accessibility of other financial systems has presented opportunities for criminals to diversify. It can be argued that cash may have been surpassed by other means to enable criminals to carry out their activities. The purpose of this research was to test this theory.  

Literature review 

A review of the existing literature identified a clear gap in existing knowledge as to exactly how criminals used cash. The research that does exist widely supports the understanding that the motivation behind a large proportion of crimes that are committed, particularly in organised crime, is greed and the pursuit of money (Cassara, 2020). Although this might be stating the obvious, the important point to note is that this motivation remains; but how it is achieved can change over time.  

As Rogoff (2016) points out, ‘the drug trade is famously cash intensive’. This is something that successive governments have recognised since the 1980s. Various legislation has come into effect designed to target criminal cash, originally from the drug trade but latterly branching out into other areas of criminality. These legislative changes include the Criminal Justice Act 1988, Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The continuance of the drug trade and the persistence of legislative changes to combat the funding behind it are indicative of the issues that remain today. 

Particularly since the terrorist attacks of 2001 and the airline bomb plot of 2006, enhanced security measures at airports should have resulted in a tightening of border controls that would make the smuggling of criminal cash harder. However, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has reported that one of the main money laundering risks for the UK was the smuggling of cash through our ports (FATF, 2018). The NCA’s National Strategic Assessment, released in August 2024, highlights that this threat remains.  

The general appeal of cash has been recognised in research. In some societies and countries, a mistrust of banks and governments makes it preferable (FATF, 2015). The anonymity of cash is also particularly appealing to criminals. Due to the ability to bypass financial institutions, there is much less likelihood for there to be a record of a cash transaction than an online banking transaction. There is equally less likelihood of suspicious cash transactions being reported to the authorities than ones that involve financial accounts. It is noted that the lower risk of detection means that criminals who use cash feel the benefits are significant (Riccardi and Levi, 2018). 

The emergence of cryptocurrency has created opportunities for criminals who view it as a means safer from detection than cash. It enables faster payments across borders than traditional cash means. That said, many criminals are familiar with cash and, like many of the general population, find the concept of cryptocurrency confusing and difficult to buy into (Cassara, 2020).  

In 2010, 56% of all payments were made in cash, which decreased to just 17% in 2020 (UK Finance, 2021). This trend is expected to continue, or become even starker since COVID-19, and the general shift towards a cashless economy. It is argued that the societal move towards a digital economy could result in a substantial reduction in criminal activity and tax evasion (Hendrickson and Luther, 2019), particularly with transactions becoming more auditable. The future of society is clearly changing. But the impact this future will have on the continued use of cash by criminals is yet to be seen.

Methodology 

To build on the literature review, I opted for a qualitative questionnaire. This will require some explanation, as the terms may appear to contradict each other.  

I opted for a questionnaire because the basis of the Europol report, on which my research was testing its conclusion, was a questionnaire to member states. Although I don’t have access to the research pool that Europol did, I sought to include as many views as possible. Therefore, the questionnaire was accessible to the general public as well as practitioners. I recognised that life experience is just as valuable and sampling a larger population would enable more useful analysis of the data.  

The questionnaire was qualitative in nature due to the questions that were asked; they were predominantly open-ended to not restrict opinions (Creswell and Clark, 2011). The anonymity of the questionnaire also supported respondents to comment freely, enabling richer and more honest data (Wincup, 2017).  

The first part of the questionnaire gathered demographic information about the participant, such as gender, age range, job role and length of time in role to assist with scrutiny of the sample. Part two consisted of seven open-ended questions to allow participants to express their opinions and perceptions of cash. The questions asked were informed by the literature review but allowed further elaboration and exploration of participants’ life experiences. Example questions included the following. 

Part three examined participants' intensity of opinions and attitudes to several statements. Responses were collected using a 5 point Likert scale (Sarantakos 2012), allowing participants to indicate one of the following: Strongly Agree; Agree; Neutral; Disagree; or Strongly Disagree.  

Although this method produced a data set which could be statistically analysed, the options allowed for broad understanding of participant feelings towards the statements. Participants were also given the option to elaborate further at the end of the questionnaire if they chose to. Examples of these assertions are as follows: 

The questionnaire was publicised on social media and emailed out to several law enforcement agencies. There were 67 participants, 50.75% from law enforcement and 49.25% from the public.  

Report findings 

The results of the questionnaire were analysed under the following four themes. 

Almost all respondents felt that criminal use of cash was still prevalent. Many cited that it is heavily linked to the drug trade. It was suggested that cash was used: "…to traffic drugs, people, to gain youngsters and promote joining of gangs to become part of County Lines. Cash still talks and impresses." (housewife) 

The appeal of cash in the way it is produced was offered by one financial investigator as an explanation for its popularity: ‘It is, in the UK, harder for law enforcement to show drugs contamination due to the notes being waterproof.’ 

Thematic analysis of the results showed that the terms ‘to launder’ and ‘money laundering’ appeared in approximately one third of responses. More than three quarters (76%) felt that cash was one of the main ways in which criminal money was laundered. When reviewing the detail behind the answers, there was a perception among many that cash was still important to criminals to fund their high-end lifestyles.