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?

[1715504846]

1715504846

[1715504846]

1715504846

[1715504846]

1715504846

[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.