Paying cards for refugees: The opposite of inclusion

In recent years, many German municipalities have introduced payment cards known as "Bezahlkarten" for asylum seekers and other marginalized groups. These cards function differently from traditional bank accounts and are designed to restrict how recipients can access and use their funds. According to Alexandra Keiner, a researcher at the Weizenbaum Institute specializing in digital payments, these cards represent a significant shift in how financial support is distributed to vulnerable populations. The system has sparked controversy, with critics arguing that it undermines inclusion rather than promoting it. The primary distinction between a Bezahlkarte and a standard Girokarte lies in the lack of a personal account. Instead, users receive a prepaid card loaded with funds, which limits their ability to manage money freely. Each municipality determines the specific restrictions placed on these cards, and private companies such as Publ°k, Secupay, and PayCenter handle the distribution and processing of transactions. In 14 federal states, payments go through the Visa network, while two use Mastercard. This arrangement has drawn criticism, particularly given Visa's historical slogan “The freedom I take,” which contrasts sharply with its role in restricting financial autonomy for certain individuals. Visa and Mastercard have shown increasing interest in expanding the use of Bezahlkarten beyond asylum seekers. These companies benefit financially from each transaction processed through the cards, making them more attractive as more people are required to use them. Additionally, Visa has positioned itself as a partner in the digital transformation of public administration, collaborating with firms like Publ°k to promote electronic payments and other digital solutions for government agencies and local authorities. This partnership extends beyond just the Bezahlkarte, signaling a broader push toward integrating private financial services into public welfare systems. Beyond financial limitations, the Bezahlkarte introduces new forms of state control and surveillance. Depending on the state and the specific design of the card, usage might be restricted to certain geographic areas. One individual recounted being unable to use his card outside a designated region without first visiting the immigration office to have it unlocked. Such measures allow authorities to monitor compliance with spatial restrictions, effectively turning the card into a tool for tracking movement and behavior. Transfers are generally limited, though exceptions exist. Initially, some interior ministers aimed to completely prohibit transfers, but this proved impractical in daily life, where individuals needed to make payments for things like train tickets or mobile phone contracts. As a result, most states now maintain a "whitelist" of approved recipients, allowing certain entities like Deutsche Bahn or mobile providers to receive payments. However, this process remains cumbersome for users requiring urgent legal assistance, as requesting an attorney’s inclusion on the whitelist depends on bureaucratic approval, which can be delayed. Critics argue that the implementation of Bezahlkarten varies significantly across regions, often becoming more restrictive in practice. While the exact details of the most repressive implementations remain unclear due to incomplete reporting, the overall trend suggests a growing reliance on these cards as a means of controlling both financial access and mobility for vulnerable populations. The debate over whether these cards serve as tools for integration or exclusion continues to unfold, highlighting deeper concerns about privacy, autonomy, and the role of private corporations in public welfare programs.