Poland's central bank, NBP, wants cash access to stop being a matter of a bank's goodwill and become a legal obligation instead. As part of work on a financial market development act, NBP has proposed closing a gap that sounds surprising: under current law, no provision actually requires a bank to let a customer withdraw their own money in cash.
What exactly NBP is proposing
Formally speaking, a bank today could in theory offer purely electronic service, since nothing explicitly obliges it to guarantee cash withdrawals — whether at a branch or through an ATM network. In practice, banks obviously do provide this, but NBP wants it to stop being a matter of market best practice and become a hard legal requirement written into the payment services act or a related regulation. The proposal entered the legislative process at the end of August 2026 and is now at the inter-ministerial consultation stage, so the road to adoption may still be long — but the direction is already clear.
This isn't the only such initiative in recent weeks — in parallel, the Ministry of Justice is working on a separate proposal concerning ATMs and cash deposit machines (focused on cash transaction security), which shows that the cash access topic is back on the legislative table with new momentum, after years when attention focused mainly on cashless payments and mobile payment apps.
Why now — cash access is shrinking off the map
NBP's proposal didn't come out of nowhere. Poland's physical cash access network has been steadily shrinking. At the end of 2025, the country had just 7,045 bank branches offering cash services and 20,409 ATMs — 332 fewer machines than a year earlier, a roughly 1.6 percent annual drop. This isn't a one-off blip; it's a trend running for several years, driven by the digitization of banking services and banks cutting the cost of maintaining a physical network.
The problem doesn't hit every region equally. Roughly a third of ATMs and half of cash-service branches sit in urban-rural and rural municipalities, where alternatives are usually far scarcer than in a big city. For someone in the capital, one branch closing is a minor inconvenience — there's another ATM a few streets away. For someone in a smaller town, it can mean a drive of several kilometers just to withdraw their own money.
What it could mean for the average bank customer
We're still talking about an early-stage proposal, so the specific rules may still change before reaching a final bill. Still, it's worth watching a few points likely to be debated over the coming months:
- A minimum accessibility standard — the most likely direction is defining how far from a customer (or how many access points per number of residents) a bank must guarantee cash withdrawal, whether through its own ATMs or by partnering with independent ATM operators or in-store cashback networks.
- Who bears the cost — maintaining an ATM and branch network is a real cost for banks, and a new legal obligation could push some institutions to pass it on to customers as fees on withdrawals beyond a set monthly limit, especially at other banks' ATMs.
- The role of independent ATM operators — a growing share of withdrawals in smaller towns already go through private ATM networks not directly tied to any one bank, so regulation could effectively formalize and strengthen the role of these intermediaries.
How to check whether your account gives you convenient cash access
Regardless of how and when the legislative process wraps up, it's already worth checking how cash access looks on the account you use day to day — differences between banks can be significant, and this topic rarely gets top billing when people pick an account.
- Check how many free withdrawals at other banks' ATMs you're entitled to each month — some banks offer this unlimited, others only if you meet conditions (like a minimum monthly inflow), and some charge from the very first withdrawal outside their own network.
- Note whether the bank you use has its own ATM network near you, or relies mostly on partner networks — a difference that becomes especially noticeable outside big cities.
- If you live in a smaller town or often travel through areas with limited banking infrastructure, cash access should be one of the criteria when choosing an account — alongside the interest rate or account maintenance fees themselves. It's worth comparing personal account offers specifically on this point before settling on a particular bank.
What to do if ATMs near you keep disappearing
If you live somewhere the cash network is genuinely shrinking, it's worth considering a few practical fixes before the problem becomes acute. More and more stores now offer cashback with a card payment — a convenient, usually completely free, alternative for smaller amounts. It's also worth checking whether a bank partner outlet operates nearby (say, at a post office or franchise network), since such points often function much like a traditional branch, even if they're less visible.
It's also a good habit to structure your savings so part of your money stays easily accessible "right now," while the rest doesn't just sit idle in a current account. If you're building that kind of buffer for a rainy day, it's worth checking the savings account ranking — funds held there can usually be transferred to your current account at any moment, and from there withdrawn in cash whenever you actually need it.
Summary — what you should do
NBP's proposal is a signal that physical cash access has stopped being a marginal issue, even in a country where mobile and contactless payments have been pushing banknotes out of wallets for years. Before any new rules — if they even take effect in their current form — actually reshape the market, check for yourself how cash access looks at your own bank, what withdrawals outside its network cost you, and whether the number of ATMs near you has grown or shrunk in recent years. If the answers don't satisfy you, this is a good moment to compare available personal accounts and pick one that combines reasonable fees with genuinely convenient access to your own money — whatever lawmakers ultimately decide.