Some sex workers say financial services providers are treating them unfairly.
The issue has come up as part of New Zealand First MP Andy Foster’s “anti-woke banking” bill which would stop banks from withdrawing services from customers for non-commercial reasons, such asa environmental concerns.
He told a select committee hearing this week that one sector he had heard concerns from was the sex industry.
One sex worker, Layla Kelly, separately posted on social media, saying she had been told by her mortgage broker that a bank would not assess her home loan application because of her occupation.
She said she had looked into the law and discovered it was legal to be discriminate on the basis of a person’s job.
“I would understand if they looked at the application and it wouldn’t meet the criteria or other requirements but they haven’t even looked at the application,” she told her followers.
She said her earnings had been consistent for three years and she was paying tax.
Cherida Fraser, of the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective, agreed it could be a problem.
Cherida Fraser of the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective agreed banking could be a problem for some sex workers. Photo / Hazel Osborne
“I’ve heard reports of many different ways that sex workers can’t get the banking they want. I spoke to one not too long ago who bought a house but she was refused income protection insurance based on her work.
“Sex workers can’t get eftpos machines sometimes without having to pay double the rental,” Fraser added.
“I’ve heard of them being denied overdrafts or loans and often for property insurance, if there’s a brothel in it, the premiums double.”
She said it was always harder for people who were contractors or self-employed rather than employees to get mortgages, anyway.
Sex workers sometimes felt they had an additional layer of checks.
“It doesn’t feel very nice. It’s frustrating when they are legitimately paying tax, ACC levies, all of that.”
Fraser said there seemed to be hangovers from the past, before sex work was decriminalised.
“There’s a pretty low risk in a brothel being in a building, for example, it’s just the same as a laundromat - the biggest risk in the dryer. Otherwise, it’s just kind of a hotel in a way.”
The issue has emerged as part of New Zealand First MP Andy Foster’s 'anti-woke banking' bill. Photo / Mike Scott
She said sometimes financial institutions were part of bigger organisations overseas where sex work was still illegal.
She said it would make a difference if occupation could be included in human rights legislation.
At the moment, people cannot be discriminated against based on their employment status - having a job or not - but that does not cover discrimination over the nature of the occupation.
Banks said they were open to providing services to sex workers, provided issues such as the potential for exploitation were addressed.
“There are sectors where we would be more cautious on a risk-based assessment,” ANZ said.
“ANZ provides lending and banking facilities to sex workers, businesses and contractors and does not have a specific policy in relation to this industry. However, issues like modern slavery would factor into a risk-based assessment.”
ANZ chief executive Antonia Watson was asked about this during a select committee hearing this week.
She said she would expect the bank to cater for a legal business owned by a woman.
“It’s a legal industry, we should bank it.”
Westpac said it would have enhanced due diligence for brothels due to the risk of exploitation.
Kiwibank said it provided banking services to individual sex workers and to brothels where businesses could show they were “effectively mitigating risks associated with the sector such as employee welfare and safety”.
Banking expert Claire Matthews said banks would be expected to apply all the checks they had in place for working with other businesses and they might exercise a higher degree of caution.
“I need to note I’m not familiar with sex work, but my perception is that there is likely to be large volumes of cash involved and any bank is going to be conscious of their anti-money laundering responsibilities.
