State Senator Introduces Bill to Make Bitcoin Legal Tender in Arizona

[24Kt]

As I was browsing the news from Coindesk, I happened to stumble this article-

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/01/28/arizona-senator-introduces-bill-to-make-bitcoin-legal-tender/

But "U.S. Constitution doesn't allow individual states to create their own legal tender"



So do you think they will be successful in making bitcoin legal tender in this state?

[1715467138]

1715467138

[Vaskiy]

The State of Arizona can pass the bill, but it needs to abide with the constitution of America. Maybe it can give access to shops and other services the legality to be used. Bitcoin to be a legal tender can't be made, maybe there'll be different laws that can get an exclusion. I'm not that technical, but from a common man's view this isn't gonna happen for now.

[Gyfts]

I don't think it even has a chance of passing the Arizona legislature, let alone surviving the court system after it were to get challenged. This senator isn't the only U.S. politician to say they want to legalize Bitcoin, there's been plenty before her -- they know they can't do it, it's just to pander so they present themselves as being outside of the establishment. We've all heard the script before.

[Darker45]

So do you think they will be successful in making bitcoin legal tender in this state?

Of course, not.

I'm not sure whether the senator is unaware that what she's proposing in the bill is unconstitutional, which is highly unlikely, or that despite knowing she's simply trying to bring this forward to try to do a Don Quixote. Or this might simply be a test attempt to somehow stir the senate or trigger a much more contentious discussion on the matter.

So whether this will be implemented or not is not a question. After all, this bill, in the most unlikely event that it is passed and eventually signed into a law, will surely be declared null and void by the federal government right away.

[DapanasFruit]

This is a good idea and the good senator must have reasons for introducing such a bill. However, good at it maybe, we have to based things on the present reality...surely this can't win in any court challenge. Maybe what they should do is to follow the one done by Florida where Bitcoin is accepted like the real money in legal transactions...heck they can even have their own coin too if they want to. Arizona is not another El Salvador for that matter. Still, this is news worthy in sense of the growing interest with some politicians to go for Bitcoin or cryptocurrency.

[Coin_trader]

I don't think it even has a chance of passing the Arizona legislature, let alone surviving the court system after it were to get challenged. This senator isn't the only U.S. politician to say they want to legalize Bitcoin, there's been plenty before her -- they know they can't do it, it's just to pander so they present themselves as being outside of the establishment. We've all heard the script before.

This is what I'm thinking too considering how volatile it is and prone to price manipulation it might put the state at risk when people start using it as legal tender then suddenly price collapsed. This is the main reason too why there's no Spot Bitcoin ETF being approved until now. Additionally, Shitty USDT can easily manipulate the price by printing tons of USDT out of thin air.

[franky1]

But "U.S. Constitution doesn't allow individual states to create their own legal tender"

more accurately, a single state cannot replace/remove the national legal tender.
but states can accept other recognised legal tenders (euros/pounds) alongside the national legal tender

There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy.

this bill is not replacing dollars.in the form of bank notes/nickel/copper coins. its instead legalising/recognising a new medium of exchange(making it a legal tender).
EG if the US was only allowed to transact national legal tender (bank notes and coins minted by the fed) then visa/mastercard, cheques would be invalid. and businesses could not refuse a $10 fee paid in 1cent coins. nor a $200 fee paid in 2x$100

but businesses can refuse bank notes and coinage. and instead decide to only accept debit cards and cheques if they wanted to, and they can accept payment in pounds and euros, etc
however. courts, police and the IRS only want $$ in any form(cheques, debit card, banknotes)

credit/debit cards is deemed as legal tender(money). as is foreign currency. a state can allow multiple currencies or forms of currency as legal tender within the state ALONGSIDE the national legal tender. but again this does not mean 1 state can replace/remove the US national legal tender

[bbc.reporter]

I don't think it even has a chance of passing the Arizona legislature, let alone surviving the court system after it were to get challenged. This senator isn't the only U.S. politician to say they want to legalize Bitcoin, there's been plenty before her -- they know they can't do it, it's just to pander so they present themselves as being outside of the establishment. We've all heard the script before.

Also, if it was passed and the governor of Arizona signed it into law, I reckon it would not make a difference. Arizona also made gold and silver legal tender during 2017, however, are the people there really using gold and silver as money? There might be less than 3% of people in Arizona that own bitcoin.

The skeptical me thinks this might only be for the Senator to get more attention. Midterm elections will be on November hehehe. However, what might be good for bitcoin as legal tender in Arizona is the removal of the capital gains tax.



Arizona Governor Approves Bill HB2014 to Make Gold & Silver Legal Tender

The moment that Arizona precious metals investors have been hoping for finally came this week, as Governor Doug Ducey signed Arizona House Bill 2014 into law. The bill eliminates state capital gains taxes on income “derived from the exchange of one kind of legal tender for another kind of legal tender,” which specifically includes specie, or coins with precious metal content. In other words, gold and silver coins will be treated, at least for Arizona state tax purposes, purely as money and no longer as commodity assets.

Source https://www.sbcgold.com/blog/arizona-governor-approves-bill-hb2014-make-gold-silver-legal-tender/

[passwordnow]

I'm not from the US. But, passing it as another legal tender for that state may become unsuccessful. This is just all about the attention since making it a legal tender became trending last year thanks to El Salvador. But let's say that it becomes for real as a legal tender there, is it possible that the POTUS will intervene on that likely to stop the implementation of it? I don't know how states and national law works there since I've never been there in my life.

[Gyfts]

I don't think it even has a chance of passing the Arizona legislature, let alone surviving the court system after it were to get challenged. This senator isn't the only U.S. politician to say they want to legalize Bitcoin, there's been plenty before her -- they know they can't do it, it's just to pander so they present themselves as being outside of the establishment. We've all heard the script before.

Also, if it was passed and the governor of Arizona signed it into law, I reckon it would not make a difference. Arizona also made gold and silver legal tender during 2017, however, are the people there really using gold and silver as money? There might be less than 3% of people in Arizona that own bitcoin.

The skeptical me thinks this might only be for the Senator to get more attention. Midterm elections will be on November hehehe. However, what might be good for bitcoin as legal tender in Arizona is the removal of the capital gains tax.



Arizona Governor Approves Bill HB2014 to Make Gold & Silver Legal Tender

The moment that Arizona precious metals investors have been hoping for finally came this week, as Governor Doug Ducey signed Arizona House Bill 2014 into law. The bill eliminates state capital gains taxes on income “derived from the exchange of one kind of legal tender for another kind of legal tender,” which specifically includes specie, or coins with precious metal content. In other words, gold and silver coins will be treated, at least for Arizona state tax purposes, purely as money and no longer as commodity assets.

Source https://www.sbcgold.com/blog/arizona-governor-approves-bill-hb2014-make-gold-silver-legal-tender/

Seems like you're right. I was under the impression Bitcoin as legal tender would operate as a new currency, but if they can classify Bitcoin as a commodity perhaps they could get around the constitutional barrier. But again, as you alluded to, these sort of attention grabbing headlines are designed to give these state senators some publicity. It doesn't take any effort to introduce a bill, anyone can do it. Then the state senator can go back to his/her constituents and brag about how pro-crypto they are citing the introduction a bill that went no where in the legislature.

[KingsDen]

There is a contradiction in the document.
See the first paragraph of the document.

The bill, SB 1341, was introduced by state Sen. Wendy Rogers, a Republican. It seeks to amend the list of accepted legal tender to include bitcoin, which means the cryptocurrency would be accepted for the payment of debt, public charges, taxes and other dues.

The bill is to seek the amendment of the constitution to include and not to replace the legal tender.

Whether such a law could go into effect is questionable, given that the U.S. Constitution doesn't allow individual states to create their own legal tender.

Bitcoin is not a creation of Arizona, and the bill is not intended to make bitcoin the only legal tender. Rather to augment the existing legal tender.
So, it can be correct to say that the bill is proposing to make bitcoin a legitimate choice for payment. This might scale through in a state like US where liberty matters most.

[freedomgo]

I'm not from the US. But, passing it as another legal tender for that state may become unsuccessful. This is just all about the attention since making it a legal tender became trending last year thanks to El Salvador. But let's say that it becomes for real as a legal tender there, is it possible that the POTUS will intervene on that likely to stop the implementation of it? I don't know how states and national law works there since I've never been there in my life.

Bitcoin is certainly legal in US  and even in most developed countries like Japan and UK. But proposing a bill to make it a legal tender may not work  because US government has its digital token from its own official currency which is CBDC ( Central Bank Digital Currency) that is fully backed by the current government system. Maybe in the near future but not in the present times. Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=us+constitution+that+prohibits+cryptocurrency

[franky1]

I'm not from the US. But, passing it as another legal tender for that state may become unsuccessful. This is just all about the attention since making it a legal tender became trending last year thanks to El Salvador. But let's say that it becomes for real as a legal tender there, is it possible that the POTUS will intervene on that likely to stop the implementation of it? I don't know how states and national law works there since I've never been there in my life.

Bitcoin is certainly legal in US  and even in most developed countries like Japan and UK. But proposing a bill to make it a legal tender may not work  because US government has its digital token from its own official currency which is CBDC ( Central Bank Digital Currency) that is fully backed by the current government system. Maybe in the near future but not in the present times. Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=us+constitution+that+prohibits+cryptocurrency

everything in life was atleast 'free' until they made a law prohibiting,restricting use of something. so its never about legalising something that was illegal. birds can fly. no law says otherwise.
no law was needed to say that birds can fly

unless they make a law to clip wings of all birds, or a law to make it criminal for someone to clip the wings of a bird
its more about recognising something officially as legal which before was just free-to-use but not recognised.

the constitution is a rule book mainly to prevent things from being prohibited, by stating certain things that should remain free no matter what may happen in the future
this law about officially recognising bitcoin is not against the constitution.

bitcoin has not been made by arizona. its not about making it a replacement of the dollar. its about recognising its legitimacy as a viable currency along side euro, pounds, yuan.

its not a law that will force businesses to only accept bitcoin in arizona and dump the dollar.

[YOSHIE]

So do you think they will be successful in making bitcoin legal tender in this state?

You don't talk to El Salvador, not because they managed to do it.

There are a few things senators have to consider, if they want to implement the Bitcoin payment law, one of them is a country that is legal Bitcoin, such as Canada, Australia, European Union etc.

countries like above, Bitcoin can work perfectly in payments, rather than illegal countries, although some illegal countries do, even if it works, there will be exceptions, there will be pros and cons, although it can work.

My response, if the senators consisted of influential elements in all sectors of the world, I believe Bitcoin's plan to be used as a means of payment/buy/sell transactions with Bitcoin, will be as successful as El Salvador has done.

[KaliLinux]

There is a contradiction in the document.
See the first paragraph of the document.

The bill, SB 1341, was introduced by state Sen. Wendy Rogers, a Republican. It seeks to amend the list of accepted legal tender to include bitcoin, which means the cryptocurrency would be accepted for the payment of debt, public charges, taxes and other dues.

The bill is to seek the amendment of the constitution to include and not to replace the legal tender.

Whether such a law could go into effect is questionable, given that the U.S. Constitution doesn't allow individual states to create their own legal tender.

Bitcoin is not a creation of Arizona, and the bill is not intended to make bitcoin the only legal tender. Rather to augment the existing legal tender.
So, it can be correct to say that the bill is proposing to make bitcoin a legitimate choice for payment. This might scale through in a state like US where liberty matters most.

I think that part is a better case for Bitcoin than an outright case of being the Legal tender. There has been a continuous argument about Bitcoin being made a legal tender by some but I think as long as the Institutions and Businesses that wish to accept Bitcoin are allowed to and not blocked as some countries have done is ok because I think the US is a place I have always believe will not give up their currency for Bitcoin as their legal tender.  

[KingsDen]

So, it can be correct to say that the bill is proposing to make bitcoin a legitimate choice for payment. This might scale through in a state like US where liberty matters most.

I think that part is a better case for Bitcoin than an outright case of being the Legal tender. There has been a continuous argument about Bitcoin being made a legal tender by some but I think as long as the Institutions and Businesses that wish to accept Bitcoin are allowed to and not blocked as some countries have done is ok because I think the US is a place I have always believe will not give up their currency for Bitcoin as their legal tender.  

That is exactly my view.  The word legal tender is somewhat ambitious and it portrays Bitcoin as fight for sovereignty. Or battling with the currencies of nations. I believe that is not the true representation of bitcoin.
Make bitcoin a legitimate means of payment in your country. Just like Euro can be converted and used in US without problems. Bitcoin should also be given that opportunity. As Euro does not plan to become a legal tender in US, so also bitcoin does not wish.

[qwertyup23]

The State of Arizona can pass the bill, but it needs to abide with the constitution of America. Maybe it can give access to shops and other services the legality to be used. Bitcoin to be a legal tender can't be made, maybe there'll be different laws that can get an exclusion. I'm not that technical, but from a common man's view this isn't gonna happen for now.

This is definitely true. Though I do not have any personal experience with federalism, but the law that the State of Arizona must kneel down before the Constitutional law as the latter is considered the supreme law in its own nature. If, in the event, that the state of Arizona does indeed successfully pass the bill (which I highly doubt so), this would definitely clash with some of the provisions of the Constitution in which the legislature will soon strike as unconstitutional.

All laws emanate from the Constitution. Whenever there is an act or a law that goes against the very nature of this supreme law, then I doubt that it will materialize, unless the legislature amends the constitution.

[peter0425]

As I was browsing the news from Coindesk, I happened to stumble this article-

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/01/28/arizona-senator-introduces-bill-to-make-bitcoin-legal-tender/

But "U.S. Constitution doesn't allow individual states to create their own legal tender"



So do you think they will be successful in making bitcoin legal tender in this state?

Not a chance for our time now , not unless the US will finally let this to happen then the legislator will give blessings for this to happen, and I'm afraid that this Senator is only riding in the popularity of Bitcoin and wanted to gain more sympathy taking chance to have supporters inside crypto market as He knew how large this is now.
But of course all of us wanting this to happen at least for the benefits of everyone here in our big community .

[Chato1977]

How i wish this can take place , I mean imagine a state in America will finally make Bitcoin as legal tender?

But of course this will remain a dream for now , though still a great concept from this great senator.

Salute for the Man ..

[passwordnow]

I'm not from the US. But, passing it as another legal tender for that state may become unsuccessful. This is just all about the attention since making it a legal tender became trending last year thanks to El Salvador. But let's say that it becomes for real as a legal tender there, is it possible that the POTUS will intervene on that likely to stop the implementation of it? I don't know how states and national law works there since I've never been there in my life.

Bitcoin is certainly legal in US  and even in most developed countries like Japan and UK. But proposing a bill to make it a legal tender may not work  because US government has its digital token from its own official currency which is CBDC ( Central Bank Digital Currency) that is fully backed by the current government system. Maybe in the near future but not in the present times. Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=us+constitution+that+prohibits+cryptocurrency

Yeah, it's legal there. But if it's about legalizing it as a legal tender, it would be sort of a big difference but allowing bitcoin in the country and making a law of it declaring it as a legal tender.
Apparently, there are exchanges that are dividing their US users to the rest of the world and I think there's the relation of a strong policy towards cryptocurrencies there but I just don't know how the higher authorities would react on it if by chance it has been passed as a law.

[TheNineClub]

Bill passing is all about lobbying. And no, I am not talking about illegal ''lobbying'', I am talking about the legal frequently used political tactic, especially in the US. I am not sure BTC has that lobbying power just yet, or the machinery that would take to push something like a bill. I doubt this goes anywhere just for the fact that it has to play by the political rules and there is not enough momentum for it right now.

[cheezcarls]

It would be bigger if Biden himself wants BTC to become legal tender in the entirety of the United States rather than just for a single or a few states like Arizona. It’s not going to be easy to officially making it as legal tender. Although that it’s still a welcoming development because the state senator embraced and saw it’s long term potential.

Even though that nothing is impossible, but I believe the chances are gonna be no to very slim to make it official based on the US government’s views on Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, especially that they are one of the strictest in regulating this industry such as banning of US citizens from participating in ICOs.

[yazher]

The State of Arizona can pass the bill, but it needs to abide with the constitution of America. Maybe it can give access to shops and other services the legality to be used. Bitcoin to be a legal tender can't be made, maybe there'll be different laws that can get an exclusion. I'm not that technical, but from a common man's view this isn't gonna happen for now.

At least they've tried to pass the bill and maybe they have some plans after that in order to make it real in the future. Since they already know that it has a high percentage outcome to be denied on the upper hands once it reached them, I'm sure they have some other backup plans in the future. This kind of proposal is rare back then and we will see these kinds of bills more often once the other nations will also make their countries a Bitcoin Legal Tender and crypto-friendly nation.

[Coyster]

It would be bigger if Biden himself wants BTC to become legal tender in the entirety of the United States rather than just for a single or a few states like Arizona.

Of course it will, but definitely you and I know Biden isn't going to do anything of that sort, neither will any state in the United States successfully implement that, I wouldn't even want to talk about this, it's more or less just like raising the hopes of those who really do not understand that making Bitcoin a legal tender in the United States is almost not possible, at least for now. I'm pretty sure we'll get big news in favor of BTC this year, but this isn't one I'm afraid.

I am not sure BTC has that lobbying power just yet, or the machinery that would take to push something like a bill. I doubt this goes anywhere just for the fact that it has to play by the political rules and there is not enough momentum for it right now.

That's true, politicians/the government wouldn't support any proposal in the favor of Bitcoin as things stand, that decentralized factor is quite a lot for them to handle, it's more like, since they can't control Bitcoin, then they just have to regulate it like they are doing.

[Poker Player]

Well, I after seeing a majority of skeptical responses I want to say that even if the bill doesn't pass, or passes and doesn't have much impact because not many people use Bitcoin in Arizona, this is very good news. Surely this year another country in South America will recognize Bitcoin as a legal tender and having a trickle of news like this means that Bitcoin has a long life left, even if some places ban it or prohibit mining it.

[DaveF]

With thinks like the goldback: https://goldback.com/
And community currencies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_community_currencies_in_the_United_States
already around, if these people were serious then there could probably be a push for BTC acceptance.

But, IMO, they are not serious. They just want the press for being "innovative" or "fighting big government" or whatever.

Not to mention, and I have said this before. Businesses are in the business of doing business. Not dealing with different forms of payment.
Until the ability to convert BTC to just about everything a business needs to run is everywhere then most places are going to want to convert to fiat to buy stuff.
It does not matter if AZ says you it's legal tender. Until your supplier takes it, it does not matter.
And it has been taken to court many times, suppliers can specify whet forms of payment they are willing to take. So if they don't want BTC they don't have to take it regardless of what the government says. *This is the same way more and more places get away with not taking cash for stuff and demand bank transfers only.

-Dave

[franky1]

i see the first step not being silly lemonade stands busking for btc in every neighbourhood, but the first step is remittance exchanges setting up in arizona where people can use their dollar buy some btc at a BTC-atm so that they can send the coin to their relatives in el-salvador, rio-d-j and other countries. as well as for people working in arizona to put funds aside in btc as a savings account because many are undocumented and cant get a bank account, yet dont want to stash cash under the mattress.

so i dont think its going to be local 7eleven letting you buy chewing gum for btc initially, but it will be businesses allowed to offer BTC-ATM's inside 7elevens and have the banks not question the large cash deposits each time they empty a BTC-atm and deposit to a bank to then buy more allotments of coin, to refill the ATM reserve.

so far banks are a little wary of bitcoin businesses, and will be less wary when arizona declares bitcoin 'legit'

[titular]

I just hope that this is implemented correctly unlike how it was done in El Salvador. While, I am not opposed to legal tender laws, I think they need to be created with the people in mind.

Dont forget El Salvador's law was passed without the public knowing, and was also passed in the dead of night. While I dont think the El Salvadorian government had any ill intentions, the way they went about getting this bill passed wasn't exactly the most transparent.

[franky1]

the el salvador government did not write a bad bill. they just didnt explain to the public any affect it can make

alot of people thought that el salv was dropping the dollar and suddenly using something else. rather than explaining its an extra option beside dollar.

[StarKay]

But "U.S. Constitution doesn't allow individual states to create their own legal tender"



So do you think they will be successful in making bitcoin legal tender in this state?

From your write-up the answer is obviously no, the US Constitution is supreme to state laws. So why is the state senator embarking on a wild goose chase? I think it's just a publicity stunt because there are other things he can do to increase adoption of bitcoin in his state. He can sponsor Crypto friendly laws aside from making it a legal tender.

[stadus]

How i wish this can take place , I mean imagine a state in America will finally make Bitcoin as legal tender?

But of course this will remain a dream for now , though still a great concept from this great senator.

Salute for the Man ..

This will remain a dream for now since it's really impossible to adopt bitcoin as a legal tender since we all know that the US constitution will never allow a cryptocurrency to be an official currency. I just think that maybe the state senator has been too rush about bitcoin being a legal tender. He could have been propose advocacies first that will inspire the people to use bitcoin since the citizens have limited knowledge about bitcoin and cryptocurrency.

[GeorgeJohn]

This is government matter, if government of U.S doesn't allow or permit state's to have their own legal tender, i think before the state have reasoned of it and digest and it came out to become obvious, i think the state have sub strategies to make it to come to reality, we know quite well that it's only legislatures can implement such for it to function appropriately. Bitcoin is a currency that's very obvious currently and understandable, if a specific state make it a legal tender i think other nations will adopt such step, op it can only work if majority of legislatures is in support to become a legal tender.

[jostorres]

I just hope that this is implemented correctly unlike how it was done in El Salvador. While, I am not opposed to legal tender laws, I think they need to be created with the people in mind.

Dont forget El Salvador's law was passed without the public knowing, and was also passed in the dead of night. While I dont think the El Salvadorian government had any ill intentions, the way they went about getting this bill passed wasn't exactly the most transparent.

Oh, so the rumours are true ? Cannot believe El Salvador really did that. I thought it was a sincere acceptance not only from one side but also from the public as well and now that El Salvador is in risk of debt because of the decline of btc, people must be putting all the blame now on their president and bukele must be realizing his mistakes now and he regrets that did that move but this one here from Arizona is different because we can clearly see that the process starts from the beginning but the chances of getting it to approve is slim  but who knows? Maybe some magic will  happen and suddenly they will change their mind.

[Pmalek]

The bill is to seek the amendment of the constitution to include and not to replace the legal tender.

That's right. If CoinDesk reported it properly, the purpose of the bill is just to add another currency to the list of legal tender in the state of Arizona. It doesn't replace the USD or makes USD non-legal tender in Arizona.

Bitcoin is not a creation of Arizona, and the bill is not intended to make bitcoin the only legal tender.

I don't think it matters whether someone tried to introduce a brand-new currency or an existing one. The point is that you are not allowed to replace the US dollar with bitcoin, euro, or the Arizona coin (if there was such a thing). 

Having said all that, I don't believe the bill will pass.

[molsewid]

Oh, so the rumours are true ? Cannot believe El Salvador really did that. I thought it was a sincere acceptance not only from one side but also from the public as well and now that El Salvador is in risk of debt because of the decline of btc, people must be putting all the blame now on their president and bukele must be realizing his mistakes now and he regrets that did that move but this one here from Arizona is different because we can clearly see that the process starts from the beginning but the chances of getting it to approve is slim  but who knows? Maybe some magic will  happen and suddenly they will change their mind.

Never heard this kind of information behind the legalization of bitcoin in El Salvador. For sure, any losses that the state economy of El salvador now have because of the dump of bitcoin will be blame on the president and I guess that's what are other El Salvadorian were thinking right now. Though to be honest the adoption of El Salvador to bitcoin was a positive event to bitcoin however the law passed without public knowledge. And talking about Arizona senators who introduces bill to make bitcoin legal tender I thought it aould be difficult to pass the bill.

[barbara44]

Bill passing is all about lobbying. And no, I am not talking about illegal ''lobbying'', I am talking about the legal frequently used political tactic, especially in the US. I am not sure BTC has that lobbying power just yet, or the machinery that would take to push something like a bill. I doubt this goes anywhere just for the fact that it has to play by the political rules and there is not enough momentum for it right now.

The last time I checked Bitcoin is legal to use in the US. So is it really necessary for people to start talking about it being a legal tender? I guess they are just doing it because of the news that El Salvador has declared Bitcoin a legal tender, so everyone now wants Bitcoin to be a legal tender in their country, which to me I don’t feel is necessary. If Bitcoin is just legal in your country, then that’s good, you can buy it and sell it, without having any problem with the government.

The main focus for now should be on countries where it is illegal to make use of Bitcoin, if there can be a way to make their governments to accept Bitcoin and make it legal for people to trade this currency in in their country, then it would be good. Just my opinion.

[oHnK]

The main focus for now should be on countries where it is illegal to make use of Bitcoin, if there can be a way to make their governments to accept Bitcoin and make it legal for people to trade this currency in in their country, then it would be good. Just my opinion.

Im not sure at all if they can be easily to make Bitcoin as legal tender in the area. But overall, honestly it doesn't matter if the country didnt make Bitcoin as legal tender but accept Bitcoin as an investment tool. As long trading and investing weren't forbidden which means still have a future for BTC can reach its ATH. Now, we know there are so many country forbid BTC which can disturb the financial system of their country.

[tygeade]

As I was browsing the news from Coindesk, I happened to stumble this article-

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/01/28/arizona-senator-introduces-bill-to-make-bitcoin-legal-tender/

But "U.S. Constitution doesn't allow individual states to create their own legal tender"



So do you think they will be successful in making bitcoin legal tender in this state?

When I saw this topic, I already had it in mind that it is not going to work, and you also stated the reason why: because the US constitution does not allow individual states to make their own legal tender. The best thing that they can do is to find a way to take it to those at the top, so that it would be declared generally in the US as a legal tender and not just in the Arizona State. That is if it is going to be possible. But for me I don’t really think making it a legal tender is all that important, I feel that as long as it is simply a legal for people to freely make use of it for most purposes, then it would be good. Anyways, let’s see how this one goes.

[bbc.reporter]

I don't think it even has a chance of passing the Arizona legislature, let alone surviving the court system after it were to get challenged. This senator isn't the only U.S. politician to say they want to legalize Bitcoin, there's been plenty before her -- they know they can't do it, it's just to pander so they present themselves as being outside of the establishment. We've all heard the script before.

Also, if it was passed and the governor of Arizona signed it into law, I reckon it would not make a difference. Arizona also made gold and silver legal tender during 2017, however, are the people there really using gold and silver as money? There might be less than 3% of people in Arizona that own bitcoin.

The skeptical me thinks this might only be for the Senator to get more attention. Midterm elections will be on November hehehe. However, what might be good for bitcoin as legal tender in Arizona is the removal of the capital gains tax.



Arizona Governor Approves Bill HB2014 to Make Gold & Silver Legal Tender

The moment that Arizona precious metals investors have been hoping for finally came this week, as Governor Doug Ducey signed Arizona House Bill 2014 into law. The bill eliminates state capital gains taxes on income “derived from the exchange of one kind of legal tender for another kind of legal tender,” which specifically includes specie, or coins with precious metal content. In other words, gold and silver coins will be treated, at least for Arizona state tax purposes, purely as money and no longer as commodity assets.

Source https://www.sbcgold.com/blog/arizona-governor-approves-bill-hb2014-make-gold-silver-legal-tender/

Seems like you're right. I was under the impression Bitcoin as legal tender would operate as a new currency, but if they can classify Bitcoin as a commodity perhaps they could get around the constitutional barrier. But again, as you alluded to, these sort of attention grabbing headlines are designed to give these state senators some publicity. It doesn't take any effort to introduce a bill, anyone can do it. Then the state senator can go back to his/her constituents and brag about how pro-crypto they are citing the introduction a bill that went no where in the legislature.

However, it should operate something similar to a new currency because if bitcoin as legal tender should be treated more as a medium of exchange like cash, why would there be a capital gains tax for cash? Capital gains tax should be imposed only for speculative investments similar to commodities and stocks.

[kryptqnick]

If the Constitution doesn't allow creating legal tender, it means that Arizona can't make their own Arizonacoin and declare is legal tender. But since it wasn't this state that created Bitcoin, I don't think this restriction applies in this case. It might still be a federal matter, of course, but not due to the restriction of creating legal tender. After all, it doesn't say that individual states aren't allowed to recognize any currencies as legal tender. I'm not very optimistic about the bill passing because it's a very big thing for a state to decide, but it probably won't be overruled on the basis of that clause of the Constitution.

[bbc.reporter]

@kryptqnick. There are also people in social media who are beginning to question if it is constitutional to make bitcoin as legal tender. They argue that there are laws that specify only gold and silver can be made legal tender. There is also the Federal Reserve act on 1933 that also included all United States coins and currencies issued by the Federal Reserve as legal tender. I might be mistaken on this, however hehe.

[Odusko]

As I was browsing the news from Coindesk, I happened to stumble this article-

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/01/28/arizona-senator-introduces-bill-to-make-bitcoin-legal-tender/

But "U.S. Constitution doesn't allow individual states to create their own legal tender"



So do you think they will be successful in making bitcoin legal tender in this state?

It's a good idea,if this will happen that means cryptocurrencies will be used to pay charges like taxes in the way we use physical cash,but I don't think a state can have it own law without approval of the federal, and the senator in question Wendy Rogers has a record of being a controversial person who has ties with anti-government group,I don't think U.S Govt  will allow  this bill to become a law,well they may see into it in the future.

[Ararbermas]

it's already stated that" the constitution doesn't allow individual state to create their own legal tender" so probably it's enough proof that bill cannot do anything thing with bitcoin on their country like what el salvador did. It's a law obviously so it's impossible in my personal opinion. But its a good idea to be honest so i hope he can find ways to implement it.