The U.S. Treasury, under the direction of President Donald Trump, has halted the production of new pennies, citing rising costs. According to the U.S. Mint’s 2024 Annual Report, producing a single Lincoln cent now costs 3.69 cents — up from 3.07 cents in 2023 and 2.72 cents in 2022. The cost of minting a nickel has also surged to 13.78 cents per coin. Given these costs, many argue that eliminating low-denomination coins is a fiscally responsible step.
But the disappearance of the penny is not just about cost-cutting — it may be an early move toward a broader shift away from physical currency altogether. And when financial access is restricted, history shows that women are often among the first to suffer.
The consequences of eliminating the penny
At first glance, eliminating the penny might seem trivial. Businesses could round prices up or down, and digital transactions could replace cash. But the transition to a cashless economy carries significant risks, especially for women, who have historically had to fight for financial independence.
Today, women still face barriers in the financial system. They are more likely to be unbanked or underbanked, particularly single mothers and women of color. They also have a higher reliance on cash-based income, including in lower-wage jobs, caregiving roles and informal economies. If pennies disappear, what follows? Nickels? Dimes? Eventually, all physical cash? And when cash is gone, who will be most vulnerable?
We need your help to stay independent
The risks of a cashless society for women
While digital transactions offer convenience, the risks of a fully cashless economy are often overlooked. The "SONAR 2023: New Emerging Risk Insights" report warns that digital payment systems are vulnerable to cyberattacks, power outages and systemic failures. If cash disappears entirely, financial access will be entirely dependent on electronic systems — controlled by banks, tech companies and government institutions.
For women, this is particularly concerning. Financial dependence has historically been a tool of control, used to limit women’s autonomy and decision-making. Even today, economic abuse —where one partner restricts another’s financial access — is a key element of domestic violence. If all transactions are digital and trackable, women trying to leave abusive situations could find themselves monitored, blocked from accessing money or unable to make anonymous purchases for their safety.
A cashless society also raises concerns about privacy and surveillance. Without cash, every transaction is recorded, meaning that women’s spending — on reproductive health, contraception or even emergency shelters — could be tracked, putting their privacy at risk. In places with restrictive laws on women’s rights, financial surveillance could be used as a tool of control, limiting their autonomy and blocking access to essential services. Without cash, women may find themselves unable to make discreet purchases for their own health and safety, leaving them more vulnerable to financial restrictions imposed by partners, financial institutions or even governments.
Financial control as a means of oppression
History has shown that restricting financial access can be an early step toward broader forms of control. In Nazi Germany, Jewish citizens’ bank accounts were frozen before other forms of persecution escalated. Under apartheid South Africa, financial restrictions were used to reinforce systemic oppression. Even in the U.S., redlining and banking discrimination have historically been used to exclude marginalized communities from wealth-building opportunities.
The erosion of financial independence often begins with small, seemingly logical steps
Fiction, too, has explored this danger. In "The Handmaid’s Tale," Margaret Atwood imagines a dystopian America where the first step toward totalitarian rule is freezing women’s bank accounts and preventing them from working. The women in Atwood’s world dismissed early warning signs— until it was too late.
We may not be on the verge of a dystopian future, but the erosion of financial independence often begins with small, seemingly logical steps. Eliminating the penny may not, on its own, lead to oppression — but it is part of a broader trend toward a world where financial access is increasingly dictated by those in power.
Why the penny matters for women
The debate over eliminating the penny isn’t just about small change — it’s about who controls financial transactions and how easily economic access can be revoked. Women have fought for generations for financial independence, from gaining the right to open bank accounts without a male co-signer to securing access to credit. But progress is fragile, and financial autonomy is only as strong as the systems that support it.
A fully digital economy is not just about efficiency; it’s about power, control, and who gets left behind. Before we dismiss the penny as obsolete, we should ask: What happens when cash is gone?
Shares