Does a cash advance hurt your credit or (official) reputation in any way? Does it appear in records at all, and would it be frowned upon if it did? What if the cash advance were taken at a casino?
I know seeing the words "cash advance" and "casino" in one question are going to set off some alarms—and while I personally don't feel compelled to defend—I should probably offer some explanation before concerned citizens of Money.SE begin their intervention :-)
My friend and I were in Vegas and had two hours to kill before catching our flights. We decided to indulge in some Blackjack—we figured $100 each, playing at min-bet tables, would entertain us for most of that time. But alas, our ATM cards were buried in our suitcases at the valet—and we decided it wasn't worth the effort and time retrieving them. But, I said why not a cash advance, and we decided it was worth the fee (which turned out to be 5%, minimum $10) to take a modest cash advance (again, $200), for the fun we'd have for two more hours. Still, we were a bit freaked out by the idea of gambling-on-credit. It was only the fact that we had commited to playing $100 each, before reaching into our pockets and realizing we didn't have our ATM cards, that convinced us we weren't gambling irresponsibly in this case—only paying a fee for convenience. Yes, one could argue it's a slippery slope, but we feel we're introspective enough to know not to do that again. I hope this post doesn't ever encourage anyone to gamble on credit—you can't beat the house advantage—and if you're smart enough to, then you can surely find some other way to raise "capital" before you try(—and if you can't, then you might want to reconsider whether you really are smart enough to beat the house advantage ;-)
Anyway, if a cash advance could hurt a person's credit, it definitely wouldn't have been worth it!
I don't see a logical reason that cash advances should be held against anyone, any more than spending on credit (in general) should, especially if the balance is paid in full each month. I feel like either way, you're offered flexibility (whether electronic or cash) according to your credit history, and you've agreed to pay high interest rates if you were to carry that advantage across more than a billing cycle.
So, what does Money.SE think? Does anyone have any personal experience? Thanks in advance.