The Cash Payment Restrictions Act is one of those laws nobody remembers until an inspection arrives. Its limits changed from 1 January 2026, returning to a dual model.
The current rules
Under § 4(1) of Act No. 394/2012 Z. z., cash payments exceeding EUR 5,000 are prohibited, unless paragraph 2 provides otherwise.
Under § 4(2), cash payments over EUR 15,000 are prohibited between individuals acting outside business.
The higher threshold applies only when both parties are individuals not acting as businesses. If either payer or recipient acts as a business, the lower threshold applies.
From 1 July 2023 to 31 December 2025, a uniform EUR 15,000 limit applied to everyone. An older transaction must be assessed under the wording effective when payment was made, not today’s rules.
Three common pitfalls
Splitting a payment does not help. The prohibition concerns the value of payments arising from a legal relationship, not each handover of banknotes. If the agreement requires payments whose total exceeds the limit during its term, no individual instalment may be paid in cash.
Repeated independent transactions are different. If each purchase is invoiced separately, the limit attaches to each invoice, even if the monthly total exceeds it. The distinction is between one legal relationship divided into instalments and independent transactions.
The prohibition also applies abroad. Under § 7, it extends to handing over and receiving cash outside Slovakia.
The contract remains valid, and the problem remains too
A breach of the prohibition does not affect the validity of the legal acts on which the payment was based (§ 5). The sale agreement therefore does not become invalid.
That does not mean nothing happens. The breach is sanctioned separately and complicates the transaction precisely where no one needs it: proving the price was actually paid.
Implications for transactions
For property and ownership interest purchase prices, the answer is straightforward: payment is not made in cash. The amounts are far above the threshold, leaving little to discuss.
More interesting are advances, reservation fees and balance payments, where the temptation is to “settle it on the spot”. If the advance belongs to the same legal relationship as the purchase price, they are assessed together.
A non-cash payment is not automatically safe, either. Money and ownership do not transfer at the same moment, so someone bears the interim risk. That is the purpose of lawyer escrow of the purchase price: money is deposited in advance and released to the seller only when the agreed condition is met.
When paying a VAT payer, it also makes sense to check that the account appears in the published list of bank accounts notified to the Financial Administration. Payment to another account is one of the statutory grounds on which the customer “should and could have known” under § 69(13) of the VAT Act that the tax would not be paid, and may therefore be liable for it.
Do not confuse this with the AML threshold
Cash payment limits are regularly confused with the threshold at which someone becomes an obliged entity under anti-money laundering legislation. That is a different regime, with different figures and obligations: customer due diligence, an internal programme and reporting unusual transactions.
They are separate regimes. Compliance with one says nothing about the other, and estate agents are affected by both.
This article provides general legal information as at 9 August 2026. It does not constitute legal services or advice on your specific matter. Laws change and the details of your situation may differ. Check the appropriate course of action or contact us before making a decision.
