Connecticut drew a clear line of sand on investing digital assets by passing House Law 7082This is what the state officially prohibits investing in cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin.
New lawThe year -old on Tuesday without a single opposition vote in the House of Representatives or the Senate is also prohibited from establishing a state -controlled bitcoin reserve.
With the draft law now, Connecticut becomes the latest mandate to harden its position on encryption amid a wave of different strategies emerging throughout the United States.
It reveals the risks of encryption and funds transfer laws to obtain renewal
As part of the newly approved legislation, Connecticut also reviewed its money transfer framework to reflect the advanced digital financing scene.
Under the updated rules, coding companies participating in transporting money must reveal all the risk of materials associated with the use of encryption assets.
This step is designed to ensure that individual and institutional users are completely aware of the speculative and volatile nature of digital currencies before dealing with these platforms.
In addition, the law provides mandatory verification of legal guardians of users under the age of 18.
This ruling seeks to add a layer of protection to minors who interact with encryption services, which reflects an increasing batch in various judicial states to implement age guarantees.
The draft law clip emphasizes a broader commitment by the state legislators to protect public financial affairs from the risks of very volatile assets.
The law also indicates that the state’s encryption regulations are likely to become more striking to move forward, especially in the areas of consumer protection and institutional control.
Connecticut breaks the direction of bitcoin reserves
Over the past year, it explored 27 American states or suggested legislation to create Bitcoin strategic reserves, as it gained the idea of traction in some circles as a hedge against inflation or long -term investment.
Texas, New Hampsheer and Arizona have passed bitcoin reserve measures at the state level, which made Connette’s direct refusal a noticeable departure from the direction.
Texas, in particular, was sound about its strategy. With a large budget surplus, he sees Bitcoin as the addition of “forward thinking” to a diverse investment portfolio.
The Texas Bluchin Council promoted the idea that bitcoin can serve as a modern store of value, and is compatible with the philosophy of investment in the state.
The move drew attention from both encryption advocates and policy participants, especially because it diverges from the most comparedly federal government approach.
On the contrary, the new Contecticut Law draws a final line in exchange for using taxpayers to bet on what some legislators continue to see as an unexpected and unexpected assets category.
This legislative position may affect other countries that still hate the risks that still weigh their options amid the volatile market behavior.
The federal position adds the complexity to the state level
At the federal level, President Donald Trump recently signed an executive command to create a strategic bitcoin reserve for the United States.
However, the matter has not yet followed detailed implementation plans, and traders have shown little enthusiasm yet.
Although this step was aimed at referring to support for digital assets at the national level, the lack of clarity left the markets not affected and raised questions about the cohesion of the American encryption policy.
Meanwhile, many states that initially showed interest in bitcoin reserves have since returned to their proposals.
Florida, Wyoming, South Dakota, Pennsylvania, Montana, Northern Dakota, and all of them threw or abandoned similar encryption bills this year.
Their withdrawal reflects increasing concerns about bitcoin fluctuations, organizational uncertainty, and their suitability as a backup asset within government portfolios.
Connecticut’s decision to legislate a ban may indicate instead of canceling the subscription to the shift towards the boundaries of the most stable policy in the states with cautious financial expectations.
As national and national governments continue to diverge the digital assets strategy, investors, companies and residents will need to move in an increasing organizational map.
Beyond Connecticut appeared, Bitcoin’s investment and tightening of encryption laws first on Invezz
