If you ever saw the exceptional Canadian series (available on Netflix), Intelligence, you know that ATMs are an excellent method for laundering drug money. So, if this article is right and considering the fees are of little importance to the launderers, could capping fees mean the only privately owned ATMs will be stocked with drug money?

Some lawmakers have an ambitious proposal: They want to cut ATM fees. Last week, a trio of Democratic senators led by Iowa’s Tom Harkin proposed capping automated teller machine fees at just 50 cents.

Currently, banks and other ATM operators are free to charge consumers whatever they want for using their machine. And backers of the amendment maintain that those who tend feel the brunt of those fees are lower- and middle-income Americans, precisely those who can’t afford it.
[…]
But suppose it did pass – would lower ATM fees really deliver a much-needed break for cash-strapped American consumers? Not necessarily. In fact, some experts suggest that capping fees might result in more harm than good for consumers.

One likely consequence would be a reduction in the number of ATMs. […] Independent operators, as a result, might choose to operate only in locations that generated a lot of foot traffic, where a greater volume of transactions would offset the decline in fees. Some community lenders and credit unions might also rethink whether it’s worth having so many ATMs for their customers.
[…]
Operators may no longer see the value, for example, in offering the latest technology such as allowing consumers to email receipts.

Even more worrisome is the possibility that banks could decide to impose a fee on all of their ATM users in order to compensate for the costs of running their ATMs.