Regarding Cash Payments (DKK)
mullvad.net
Danish banks have implemented significant restrictions on how Danish kroner (DKK) used outside Denmark can be repatriated back into Denmark.

Danish banks have implemented significant restrictions on how Danish kroner (DKK) used outside Denmark can be repatriated back into Denmark.

Due to these circumstances, which are unfortunately beyond Mullvad’s control, Mullvad will no longer be able to accept DKK from its customers. We will continue to credit DKK received until the end of the month, but considering postal delays, it is best to stop sending it immediately.

  • vzq
    66·
    2 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • nis@feddit.dk
      57·
      6 months ago

      They can pry my kroner from my cold dead hands!

      But seriously, you’re right. What makes it even stranger is that the value of kroner is pegged at 746,038 kroner pr. 100 euro. Which, basically, is just euros with extra steps.

      • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
        21·
        6 months ago

        There’s a lot more to sovereign monetary policy than currency exchange rates, such as the capital controls being exercised here

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
        10·
        6 months ago

        It’s more related to the fact that once you join the Eurozone (ERM II) there’s no way to take it back, and for some reason this resonates negatively with Danish people. AFAIK there’s been opinion polls the suggest that a referendum on the matter would (still) not pass. Also AFAIK the Danish political agenda does not lean particularly for or against it otherwise, as you said, it’s technically moot either way.

        • taladar@sh.itjust.works
          10·
          6 months ago

          You do realize that Danish and Dutch are two entirely different people in two entirely different countries?

          • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
            8·
            6 months ago

            Ha ha, sorry, I’m having an early morning moment. I’ve kept talking about Dutch instead of Danish, I’ll fix it.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
      25·
      6 months ago

      I think it’s important to remember that the Eurozone has two stages (ERM I and II) and they’re both important but for different reasons.

      ERM I is about achieving long term economical stability, which is established according to a series of indices called convergence criteria, that are evaluated every two years on even years. A member can technically apply for the second stage if they pass only two consecutive evaluations (4 years) with all-green marks, but the members that join nowadays do so after about a decade of green evaluations.

      The goal of ERM I is to make sure a member’s economy is stable to the point that switching the currency to the euro becomes moot. But it is also a win in itself (long term economical balance).

      You may wonder why even bother with ERM II if every member were ERM I. Well, ERM I is what is called a common monetary policy – but ERM II is a common fiscal policy, which would mean deeper alignment and integration of all fiscal instruments across the Union.

      There is no deadline that the members must meet but most EU members are legally committed to entering ERM II someday. There’s no deadline because you can’t wish economic stability true; each member will achieve it when it achieves it.

      To give some examples:

      • Denmark has been passing ERM I convergence criteria for more than a decade and can technically enter ERM II at any time and would be a formality. But they have an opt-out that says they are extempt from the legal committment to do so. Also, Danish public opinion is split fairly evenly about it.
      • Croatia and Bulgaria have met the criteria for more than 10 years before they adopted the euro.
      • The UK has never met the criteria between 2012-2018 so they couldn’t have adopted the euro even if they wanted to. But of course they didn’t want to, and also had a legal opt-out.
      • Romania is one of the members that’s legally committed to entering ERM II but have never managed to achieve two consecutive green evaluations since 2012. And that’s despite the fact their economy is in arguably better shape than Bulgaria’s (in volume and growth).
      • vzq
        3·
        2 months ago

        deleted by creator

    • Grippler@feddit.dk
      6·
      6 months ago

      It’s not really that central, every single eurozone country is south of Denmark. Denmark is only at the periphery of the eurozone.

      • Thomas@discuss.tchncs.de
        12·
        6 months ago

        Well, you have Finland in the north-east, Ireland in the north-west, and every land border faces a Euro-zone country. Few other countries can claim the latter.

        • Grippler@feddit.dk
          5·
          6 months ago

          “Every land border”…There is only one…

          Edit: and looking at a map, actually several countries have “every land border” to eurozone countries. Portugal, Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg all fit that one, several with multiple land borders even. That’s 30% of the eurozone countries.

          • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
            9·
            6 months ago

            Denmark does in fact have a very small land border with Canada - this happened quite recently and is pretty funny. So it’s actually 2! 😄

            • Grippler@feddit.dk
              2·
              6 months ago

              overseas territories would probably be island states, so they’re unlikely to have a land border to any country at all. But sure, maybe there is some. But then the Danish/Canadian border would count too, making it untrue for Denmark as well.