I had an odd experience happen at McDonalds the other day. I purchased food items that were $9.42 cents with a $10.00 bill. I normally use a card so you can imagine my “scratching my head moment” when my change should have been .58 cents, but I only received .55 cents instead.

I was given two quarters and a nickel. Where were the .03 cents? Now… did I pay $9.45 cents for a $9.42 cent purchase because they just kept the .03 cents instead of giving it back to me in change. The .03 cents is trivial, but as I began to weigh the principal of this transaction, it did not feel equitable.

Who does killing the penny benefit? The consumer or the service provider. I know the government benefits as it saves money on not having to print something that costs more than it’s worth to print. But trickling down I don’t believe protocols were put in place to minimize confusion or solidify exactly how some of these businesses were going to handle not using pennies. And if there was, not everyone got the message.

A. The Absence of Clear Rules

This bothered me because I wasn’t informed that this would happen, I did not give my consent to keep my change and there was no signage anywhere on the topic of cash rounding. They just audaciously took my .03 cents and expected me to say nothing. If you add up all those pennies (thousands and thousands of little transactions) that the store keeps, they will surely make a hefty profit this year.

This made me think back to Edmund Burkes adage: the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing. This statement suggests that passivity can enable wrongdoing to thrive highlighting the moral responsibility to actively do something OR say something. I just believe that times like this is where we emphasize the importance of taking action against fragmented systems, injustice or wrongdoing in the midst of a transition that will become normal.

So, the new normal for cash is no pennies. How will this transition affect us and balance fairness when using cash or are we just going through growing pains with “cash rounding” until everyone catches up. Let’s back up and look at this slowly because the absence of clear rules will increase confusion and disputes at the register.

1) “Killing the penny” in the U.S.: what’s actually happening right now

As of November 12, 2025, the U.S. Mint has stopped producing new pennies for circulation (pennies still remain legal tender, but no new ones are being made for everyday use). Reuters+1

The key driver: it costs more than a penny to make and distribute a penny—about 3.69¢ per 1¢ coin (FY 2024 figures). United States Mint+1

This shift is why cash rounding is becoming a practical issue for consumers now, especially in cash-heavy businesses like fast food. NCSL+1

---

2) “Cash Rounding”- The protocol that’s supposed to make rounding feel fair

The standard “nearest 5 cents” cash-rounding rule (typical)

A common rule set looks like this:

• Ends in 1¢ or 2¢ → round down to 0¢
• Ends in 3¢ or 4¢ → round up to 5¢
• Ends in 6¢ or 7¢ → round down to 5¢
• Ends in 8¢ or 9¢ → round up to 10¢

That’s exactly the kind of protocol institutions are already publishing for cash handling. Cornell Finance+1

Two critical fairness points

1. Rounding should apply only to the final cash total, not each item.
2. Electronic payments (card, tap, app) should stay exact to the cent, …no rounding. This is how other countries handled it and how U.S. commentary describes the likely implementation. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond+1

Note: If a business rounds only in the direction that helps them (always up), that’s not “rounding,” that’s a hidden price increase.

---

3) Who does killing the penny benefit: consumer or service provider?

It’s not one-sided. There are three buckets of “winners/losers”:

A) Bucket 1-The U.S. government/taxpayer (big winner)

When the government makes a coin that costs more than its face value, it creates a loss (negative seigniorage) (Pronounced Sin-your-age). In 2024, that loss on pennies was large enough to be widely discussed in Fed research and the Mint’s reporting. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond+1
Recent reporting around the policy change points to tens of millions of dollars per year in savings by stopping penny production. Reuters+1

Where does that saved money go?
It’s not a special “penny fund.” It reduces the Mint/Treasury’s need to cover losses—so functionally it benefits public finances overall (i.e., less waste / less subsidy of loss-making coin production). United States Mint+1

B) Bucket 2- Retailers/service providers (mixed)

Retailers can benefit in two ways:

1. Lower cash-handling friction (fewer low-value coins to count, store, transport).
2. Rounding gains if rounding is biased upward or if pricing strategies adapt.

But in a competitive market, “extra pennies” are hard to keep forever without losing customers—especially if people notice. Still, in the short run, biased rounding can shift money from consumers to merchants.

C) Bucket 3- Consumers (mixed, depends on the rounding rule)

Consumers can benefit from:

• Faster checkout
• Less coin clutter
• In some rounding patterns, you round down as often as up (close to “neutral” over many purchases)

Consumers can lose via:

• A “rounding tax”: tiny per-transaction losses that add up nationally
  Richmond Fed research estimated this could cost consumers on the order of millions per year (not billions), assuming typical rounding behavior. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

---

4) “IF they kept 3 cents from everyone” example:

Logically small amounts scale fast, but the inputs matter and will vary per situation.

Scenario

• “3¢ kept per customer”
• “400 people buy food”
• “per day × 30 days”

If a business truly kept 3¢ from 400 people per day, then:

• Per day: 400 × $0.03 = $12/day
• Per 30-day month: $12 × 30 = $360/month
• Per year $4320.00

If it were 1,500 people per day:

• Per day: 1,500 × $0.03 = $45/day
• Per month: $45 × 30 = $1,350/month
• Per year $16,200.00

That is real cash money from pennies kept by just one service provider.

The bigger reality check

Under a fair “nearest nickel” protocol, the expected gain to the retailer from rounding should be near zero IF:

• last-digit totals are roughly evenly distributed, and
• the rule is symmetric (down as often as up)

The biggest fairness risk is how “5-cent endings” are handled (because you can’t round 5 to the nearest 5 without a tie-breaking rule). The Atlanta Fed notes this “exactly 5 cents” issue makes perfectly symmetric rounding impossible in that specific case—so the details matter. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

---

5) What an “equitable” system looks like (so you don’t feel cheated)

For cash transactions, businesses should do all of the following:

1. Post signage at the register stating the rounding rule (customers shouldn’t have to guess).
2. Round only the final total (not per item).
3. Apply a standard nearest-nickel rule (like the 1–2 down / 3–4 up / 6–7 down / 8–9 up framework). Cornell Finance+1
4. Keep electronic payments exact to the cent. Budget Canada+1
5. Offer the customer the option: “If you want exact change, pay by card/app” (or allow exact change if the customer has it).

If McDonald’s (or any retailer) is doing rounding, your example $9.42 should not result in a 3¢ loss unless the actual total was different or the process was wrong.

---

6) Pros and cons of “killing the penny”

Pros

1) Cuts a known loss-maker

• The Mint reports penny unit costs well above face value (about 3.69¢ per penny recently). United States Mint+1

2) Faster transactions + lower handling costs

• Less counting, fewer coin rolls, fewer shortages/friction—especially for high-volume retailers.

3) Less “dead money”

• Pennies often sit unused (in jars, cars, drawers). Removing them from production acknowledges that many aren’t circulating efficiently. The Washington Post+1

Cons

1) Risk of a “rounding tax”

• Even if small, it’s real at scale; Fed research has estimated consumer costs in the millions annually under typical rounding behavior. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

2) Consumer trust / perceived unfairness

• If customers see patterns like “always rounding up,” confidence drops. This story is exactly how that perception forms.

3) Pricing psychology

• “$3.99” pricing is a classic tactic. If cash totals must round, some retailers may adapt pricing strategies to protect margin.

4) Patchwork rules

• States and institutions are still working out guidance; absence of clear rules increases confusion and disputes at the register. NCSL+1

---

7) So Again… who is actually benefiting?

• Taxpayers/government benefit clearly by avoiding the ongoing cost of producing a coin that loses money. United States Mint+1
• Retailers benefit operationally (efficiency). Financially, they benefit only if rounding rules/pricing create a net inflow.
• Consumers benefit on convenience, but can lose money if rounding is biased, unclear, or inconsistently applied.

---

8) What to do next (practical)

If this happens again:

1. Ask for a receipt and confirm whether the total was $9.42 or $9.45.
2. Ask “Are you rounding cash totals to the nearest nickel?”
3. If the posted policy (or the applied policy) effectively always favors the store, that’s worth escalating to the store manager or corporate customer care, because transparent rounding rules are the whole point of making this transition equitable.

B. Impact calculation when improper cash rounding occurs

Key Assumption

• Let’s assume improper or biased rounding keeps $0.03 per cash transaction
• This is not per person per day, but per transaction

---

1. Single Store Impact

A. Conservative estimate:

• 300 cash transactions/day
• $0.03 retained per transaction

Daily:
300 × $0.03 = $9.00/day

Annual:
$9 × 365 = $3,285 per store per year

---

B. High-volume fast-food location:

• 1,000 cash transactions/day

Daily:
1,000 × $0.03 = $30/day

Annual:
$30 × 365 = $10,950 per store per year

---

2. Regional / National Impact (Illustrative)

If just 5,000 locations nationwide retained $10/day via undisclosed rounding:

• $10 × 5,000 = $50,000/day
• $50,000 × 365 = $18.25 million per year

This money:

• Is not wages
• Is not service improvement
• Is not tax-transparent at transaction level
• Is effectively micro-extracted from consumers

---

3. Why Seniors & Fixed-Income Households Are Hit Hardest

• Seniors are more likely to:
  • Pay cash
  • Budget to the dollar
  • Track spending closely
• Fixed-income households cannot “average out” repeated losses
• Even $3–5/month matters when:
  • Choosing meals
  • Managing prescriptions
  • Stretching benefits

This becomes a regressive micro-cost, not a neutral convenience.

4. Bottom line first (plain and direct)

Fact: What happened to me was not equitable and not properly disclosed.
Even if a business chooses to eliminate pennies in practice, they must apply rounding neutrally and transparently.

• $9.42 should NOT result in $0.55 change under any standard rounding protocol
• $9.42 rounds DOWN to $9.40, not up
• Your correct change should have been $0.60, not $0.55
• You were shorted 3¢, and you were not informed in advance

That is not a “penny problem.”
That is a process and disclosure failure.

---

5. Maryland-specific reality (important)

🔹 Pennies are still legal tender in Maryland

• Maryland has no law that allows a retailer to unilaterally keep your change
• There is no Maryland statute authorizing businesses to round only in their favor
• Any rounding must be:
  • Neutral
  • Applied only to the final total
  • Clearly disclosed before payment

If a customer is not informed before handing over cash, the transaction defaults to exact change owed.

---

6. Why the transaction fails every fairness test

Let’s apply every legitimate standard that exists.

A. Mathematical correctness

• $10.00 − $9.42 = $0.58 owed
• I received $0.55
• Shortfall = 3¢

No ambiguity. No interpretation.

---

B. Standard rounding protocol (if one existed)

The only widely accepted cash-rounding framework is:

Ending	Proper Action
$x.01–$x.02	Round DOWN
$x.03–$x.04	Round UP
$x.06–$x.07	Round DOWN
$x.08–$x.09	Round UP

➡ $9.42 → $9.40
➡ Change owed = $0.60

My experience violates the rounding rule even if rounding were allowed.

---

C. Disclosure requirement (this is critical)

For a rounding system to be ethical and defensible, the business must:

1. Post signage at the register
2. Inform customers before payment
3. Apply the rule symmetrically

You stated:

• ❌ No signage
• ❌ No verbal notice
• ❌ No choice offered

That alone makes the rounding improper.

---

7. The intuition about “millions of pennies” is economically sound

Fact: Small amounts scale fast.

Scenario: Let’s run clean, realistic numbers.

If a store improperly keeps just 3¢ per cash customer

Example 1: Modest volume

• 500 cash customers/day × $0.03 = $15/day
• $15 × 30 days = $450/month
• $450 × 12 months = $5,400/year

Example 2: High-volume fast-food location

• 1,500 cash customers/day × $0.03 = $45/day
• $45 × 365 days = $16,425/year

➡ That is pure margin:

• No labor increase
• No supply cost
• No overhead
• No tax classification as “income” at the transaction level

This is why lack of transparency matters.

---

8. Who benefits when pennies are “killed” … honestly

✅ The government (clear winner)

• Pennies cost ~3–4¢ each to produce
• Ending production saves tens of millions annually
• This reduces Treasury losses (not earmarked for consumers)

⚠️ Businesses (conditional winner)

They benefit only if:

• Rounding is biased
• Pricing is adjusted strategically (e.g., more totals ending in .42–.44)
• Customers don’t notice or don’t challenge

My experience shows exactly how this shifts money upward.

❌ Consumers (unless protected)

Consumers lose when:

• Rounding is silent
• Rounding always favors the merchant
• Cash users subsidize card users
• No opt-out is offered

This is effectively a micro tax on cash, which disproportionately affects:

• Seniors
• Fixed-income individuals
• Unbanked / underbanked populations

That makes this not just financial, but equity related.

---

9. What should have happened (fair protocol)

A fair system would do all of the following:

1. Sign at the register “Cash totals are rounded to the nearest 5¢. Card payments are exact.”
2. Correct rounding
   • $9.42 → $9.40
   • $9.47 → $9.45 or $9.50 (depending on rule)
3. Customer choice
   • Pay cash (rounded)
   • Pay card (exact)
   • Or give exact change

I was not given any of these.

---

10. What you can do (practical next steps)

Option A: Local store resolution

• Ask the store manager:
  • “What is your cash rounding policy?”
  • “Where is it posted?”
• Request the 3¢ (yes, on principle)

Option B: Corporate complaint (stronger)

McDonald’s corporate does track pricing integrity issues.

Corporate Phone Number	Call 630-623-3000
Customer Service Phone Number	+1-800-244-6227

When reporting, state clearly:

• Location (store number if possible)
• Date/time
• Cash payment
• Exact total ($9.42)
• Change received ($0.55)
• No posted or verbal rounding disclosure

Key phrase to use:

“Undisclosed rounding that resulted in a customer shortfall.”

Option C: Maryland Consumer Protection

Maryland’s Consumer Protection Act prohibits unfair or deceptive trade practices, including:

• Failure to disclose material pricing practices
• Misrepresentation at point of sale

You don’t need to claim fraud, only the lack of disclosure and financial harm, however small.

---

11. Final judgment (plain truth)

It was not wrong to speak up and question the protocol, nor was it overreacting, or misunderstanding math for .03cents. It was the principal I questioned because the act did not feel equitable.

What I experienced:

• Was not proper rounding
• Was not disclosed
• Was not equitable
• And it benefits the service provider, not the consumer

So, be reminded, pennies may be disappearing, but fairness, disclosure, and choice are not supposed to disappear with them.

Join our newsletter at newsletter@erinsagelessessentials.com and stay informed because knowledge is the cure to healthy aging.

Submitted by Erin’s Ageless-Essentials