Blockchain 2019 Legislation

Heather Morton 7/23/2019

Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology that records and shares every transaction that occurs in the network of users.

One example of how blockchain works is in a sales transaction using distributed ledger technology and a digital currency as payment in the transaction. In this example, the buyer initiates the purchase, known as the block, which contains transaction data such as the date, time and payment amount. Both the buyer and seller can see the block of transaction data, so both parties can confirm that the payment was sent and received. Each transaction’s block is created in a shared online accounting ledger that can involve multiple buyers and sellers within a network. As new transactions occur between the buyer and seller, each data block is recorded and forms the chain that documents the transaction history. 

Blockchains can be permissionless, also called public, which are typically open for anyone to view and participate. Or, blockchains can be permissioned, which limit the participation to a single administrator or a specific group of participants.

Digital currencies are only one way to use blockchain. Other evolving applications can include online voting, medical records, insurance policies, property and real estate records, copyrights and licenses and supply chain tracking. They can also include smart contracts, where payouts between the contracted parties are embedded in the blockchain and automatically execute when contractual conditions have been met.

Twenty-eight states have introduced legislation relating to blockchain in 2019. Twenty-seven bills and resolutions have been enacted or adopted.

 

Blockchain 2019 Legislation
State Bill Number Bill Summary
Alabama None  
Alaska None  
Arizona

HB 2747
Signed by governor 5/31/19, Chapter 263

Appropriates $2.5 million from the state web portal fund established by §18-421, Arizona Revised Statutes, in fiscal year 2019-2020 to the Arizona commerce authority to distribute to applied research centers and institutes located in this state that specialize in blockchain, wearable technology and automated mobility.

Arkansas

HB 1944
Signed by governor 4/16/19, Act 1061

Defines blockchain distributed ledger technology, blockchain technology, and smart contract; provides that a signature, record, or contract that is secured through blockchain technology is considered to be in electronic form; provides that a smart contract shall be considered a commercial contract.

California SB 373

Passed Senate 5/6/19

Existing law requires the state registrar, local registrar, or county recorder, upon request and payment of the required fee, to supply to an applicant a certified copy of the record of a birth, fetal death, death, marriage, or marriage dissolution registered with the official. Existing law authorizes the state registrar, a local registrar, or a county recorder to furnish a certified copy of a birth, death, or marriage record to an authorized person and defines the term “authorized person” for these purposes. Existing law requires certain types of applicants for a certified record to execute a statement sworn under penalty of perjury that the person is an authorized person who is allowed to receive the certified record. Existing law requires certified copies of birth, death, and marriage records be printed on chemically sensitized security paper with specified features, including, among others, watermarks, fluorescent fibers, and intaglio print. This bill authorizes a county, until Jan. 1, 2022, to issue certified copies of marriage records by means of blockchain technology, as defined, and would exempt those records from the required physical properties and features in the provisions described above.

Colorado

HB 1247
Signed by governor 5/30/19, Chapter 375

The bill directs the commissioner of agriculture to convene an advisory group to study the potential applications for blockchain technology in agricultural operations and to report to the General Assembly in 2020 with its findings and recommendations for legislation, if any. The advisory group is subject to repeal July 1, 2020.

Colorado

SB 184
Postponed indefinitely 3/21/19

The bill directs the Colorado Water Institute at Colorado State University to study the potential uses of blockchain technology to manage a database of water rights; facilitate the establishment or operation of water markets or water banks, and for any other useful purpose in the administration of the institute's powers and duties; and report the results to the General Assembly.

Connecticut

HB 5417
Passed House 5/22/19

Establishes a task force to study on blockchain technology for use in managing elector registration, including for the purpose of reducing duplicate registrations within the ledger upon which elector information is stored.

Connecticut

HB 6062
Failed Joint Favorable deadline 4/3/19

Establishes a task force to study the use of blockchain technology, or other similar technology, for the purpose of casting votes at an election by means of the internet.

Connecticut

HB 7310

Failed Joint Favorable deadline 3/19/19

Authorizes the use of smart contracts in commerce in the state.

Connecticut SB 1032

This bill requires the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) secretary to develop a plan to incorporate blockchain technology to make a state administrative function more efficient by Oct. 1, 2020, and in consultation with the Department of Administrative Service’s Division of Information Technology’s chief information officer. By Oct. 1, 2021, the OPM secretary must submit the plan to the Commerce and Government Administration and Elections committees.

Connecticut

SB 1033
Failed Joint Favorable deadline 3/19/19

Prohibits the use of noncompete agreements in the blockchain technology industry.

Delaware

SB 89
Signed by governor 6/19/19, Chapter 46

This bill continues the practice of amending periodically the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (the “Act”) to keep it current and to maintain its national preeminence. Section 1. This section amends §17-101 of the Act in several respects. New definitions are added for “document” and “electronic transmission,” which terms appear in new §17-113 among other places in the Act. Section 4. This section amends §§17-104(d) and 17-104(e) of the Act to include references to protected series and registered series, as appropriate, and §Section 17-104(g) to conform with the addition of the defined term “electronic transmission” in §17-101. Section 7. This section adds new §17-113 of the Act, which establishes non-exclusive, safe harbor methods to reduce certain acts or transactions to a written or electronic document and to sign and deliver a document manually or electronically. The terminology in §17-113(a) is based on analogous provisions in existing §§17-302(e) and 17-405(d) of the Act, the Delaware Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (“UETA”), and the Model Business Corporation Act, with modifications. Section 17-113(a) permits limited partnership transactions (such as entering into agreements of merger not filed with the secretary of state) to be documented, signed and delivered through “Docusign” and similar electronic means. The §17-113(a) safe harbor provisions apply solely for purposes of determining whether an act or transaction has been documented, and whether a document has been signed and delivered, in accordance with the Act and the partnership agreement. Section 17-113(a) does not preempt any statute of frauds or other law that might require actions be documented, or that documents be signed and delivered, in a specified manner. Section 17-113(a) clarifies how its provisions operate in connection with a transaction conducted pursuant to UETA. To the extent UETA does not apply to a transaction (under §12A-103 of UETA) because the transaction is governed by the Act, the parties to the transaction can satisfy the Act by complying with §17-113(a). Section 17-113(b) addresses certain actions and documents that are not governed by §17-113(a). There is no presumption that these excluded items are prohibited from being effected by electronic or other means, but §17-113 may not be relied on as a basis for documenting an act or transaction, or signing or delivering a document, if the exclusions set forth in §17-113(b) apply. Certain of these excluded items are governed by separate provisions that facilitate the use of electronic media, including documents filed with the secretary of state (governed by §17-206(a)). Section 17-113(b) permits partnership agreement provisions that restrict the use of §17-113(a), but those restrictions must be expressly stated. A provision merely specifying that an act or transaction will be documented in writing, or that a document will be signed or delivered manually, will not prohibit the application of §17-113(a). Section 17-113(c) addresses the interaction between the provisions of the Act and the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (the “E-Sign Act”). Section 17-113(c) evidences an intent to allow the Act to govern the documentation of actions, and the signature and delivery of documents, to the fullest extent the Act is not preempted by the E-Sign Act. Sections 23 and 24. These sections amend §17-302(e) and §17-405(d) of the Act to conform with the addition of the defined term “electronic transmission” in §17-101.

Delaware

SB 90
Signed by governor 6/19/19, Chapter 47

This bill continues the practice of amending periodically the Delaware Revised Uniform Partnership Act (the “Act”) to keep it current and to maintain its national preeminence. Section 1. This section amends §15-101 of the Act to include definitions for “document” and “electronic transmission.” These terms appear in new §15-124 among other places in the Act. “Electronic transmission” previously was defined in §15-407(d) of the Act, and the new definition provides specific statutory authority for Delaware partnerships to use networks of electronic databases (examples of which are described currently as “distributed ledgers” or a “blockchain”) for “electronic transmissions.” Section 4. This section adds new §15-124 of the Act, which establishes non-exclusive, safe harbor methods to reduce certain acts or transactions to a written or electronic document and to sign and deliver a document manually or electronically. The terminology in §15-124(a) is based on analogous provisions in existing §15-407(d) of the Act, the Delaware Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (“UETA”), and the Model Business Corporation Act, with modifications. Section 15-124(a) permits partnership transactions (such as entering into agreements of merger not filed with the secretary of state) to be documented, signed and delivered through “Docusign” and similar electronic means. The §15-124(a) safe harbor provisions apply solely for purposes of determining whether an act or transaction has been documented, and whether a document has been signed and delivered, in accordance with the Act and the partnership agreement. Section 15-124(a) does not preempt any statute of frauds or other law that might require actions be documented, or that documents be signed and delivered, in a specified manner. Section 15-124(a) clarifies how its provisions operate in connection with a transaction conducted pursuant to UETA. To the extent UETA does not apply to a transaction (under Section 12A-103 of UETA) because the transaction is governed by the Act, the parties to the transaction can satisfy the Act by complying with §15-124(a). Section 15-124(b) addresses certain actions and documents that are not governed by §15-124(a). There is no presumption that these excluded items are prohibited from being effected by electronic or other means, but §15-124 may not be relied on as a basis for documenting an act or transaction, or signing or delivering a document, if the exclusions set forth in §15-124(b) apply. Certain of these excluded items are governed by separate provisions that facilitate the use of electronic media, including documents filed with the secretary of state (governed by §15-105(c)). Section 15-124(b) permits partnership agreement provisions that restrict the use of §15-124(a), but those restrictions must be expressly stated. A provision merely specifying that an act or transaction will be documented in writing, or that a document will be signed or delivered manually, will not prohibit the application of §15-124(a). Section 15-124(c) addresses the interaction between the provisions of the Act and the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (the “E-Sign Act”). Section 15-124(c) evidences an intent to allow the Act to govern the documentation of actions, and the signature and delivery of documents, to the fullest extent the Act is not preempted by the E-Sign Act. Section 5. This section amends §§15-403(c) of the Act to provide specific statutory authority for Delaware partnerships to use networks of electronic databases (examples of which are described currently as “distributed ledgers” or a “blockchain”) for the creation and maintenance of partnership records. Section 6. This section amends §15-407(d) of the Act to conform with the addition of the defined term “electronic transmission” in §15-101.

Delaware

SB 91
Signed by governor 6/19/19, Chapter 48

This bill continues the practice of amending periodically the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act (the “Act”) to keep it current and to maintain its national preeminence. Section 1. This section amends §18-101 of the Act to include definitions for “document” and “electronic transmission,” and to amend the definitions of “manager” and “member.” The terms “document” and “electronic transmission” appear in new §18-113 among other places in the Act. The changes to the definition of “manager” confirm that the term includes a manager of the limited liability company generally and a manager associated with a series of the limited liability company, and the changes to the definition of “member” confirm that the term includes a member of the limited liability company generally and a member associated with a series of the limited liability company. Section 3. This section amends §18-104(g) to conform with the addition of the defined term “electronic transmission” in §18-101. Section 4. This section adds new §18-113 of the Act, which establishes non-exclusive, safe harbor methods to reduce certain acts or transactions to a written or electronic document and to sign and deliver a document manually or electronically. The terminology in §18-113(a) is based on analogous provisions in existing §§18-302(d) and 18-404(d) of the Act, the Delaware Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (“UETA”), and the Model Business Corporation Act, with modifications. Section 18-113(a) permits limited liability company transactions (such as entering into agreements of merger not filed with the secretary of state) to be documented, signed and delivered through “Docusign” and similar electronic means. The §18-113(a) safe harbor provisions apply solely for purposes of determining whether an act or transaction has been documented, and whether a document has been signed and delivered, in accordance with the Act and the limited liability company agreement. Section 18-113(a) does not preempt any statute of frauds or other law that might require actions be documented, or that documents be signed and delivered, in a specified manner. Section 18-113(a) clarifies how its provisions operate in connection with a transaction conducted pursuant to UETA. To the extent UETA does not apply to a transaction (under §12A-103 of UETA) because the transaction is governed by the Act, the parties to the transaction can satisfy the Act by complying with §18-113(a). Section 18-113(b) addresses certain actions and documents that are not governed by §18-113(a). There is no presumption that these excluded items are prohibited from being effected by electronic or other means, but §18-113 may not be relied on as a basis for documenting an act or transaction, or signing or delivering a document, if the exclusions set forth in §18-113(b) apply. Certain of these excluded items are governed by separate provisions that facilitate the use of electronic media, including documents filed with the secretary of state (governed by §18-206(a)). Section 18-113(b) permits limited liability company agreement provisions that restrict the use of §18-113(a), but those restrictions must be expressly stated. A provision merely specifying that an act or transaction will be documented in writing, or that a document will be signed or delivered manually, will not prohibit the application of §18-113(a). Section 18-113(c) addresses the interaction between the provisions of the Act and the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (the “E-Sign Act”). Section 18-113(c) evidences an intent to allow the Act to govern the documentation of actions, and the signature and delivery of documents, to the fullest extent the Act is not preempted by the E-Sign Act. Section 5. This section amends §18-206(b) of the Act to clarify that the certificate of formation or certificate of registered series, as applicable, shall be amended, corrected or restated upon the filing of a certificate of amendment (or judicial decree of amendment), certificate of correction, corrected certificate or restated certificate, and to confirm that a certificate of registered series is canceled upon a certificate of conversion of such registered series to protected series becoming effective. Section 6. This section amends §18-210 of the Act to provide that a plan of division may provide for contractual appraisal rights and that contractual appraisal rights may be made available in connection with any merger or consolidation in which a registered series is a constituent party, any division of the limited liability company, any conversion of a protected series to a registered series of the limited liability company, and any conversion of a registered series to a protected series of the limited liability company. Sections 14 and 15. These sections amend §§18-302(d) and 18-404(d) of the Act to conform with the addition of the defined term “electronic transmission” in §18-101.

District of Columbia None  
Florida

HB 735
Laid on table 5/1/19

Establishes Florida Blockchain Task Force in Department of Financial Services (DFS); provides for membership and duties of task force; requires task force to submit report to governor and Legislature and make presentations; requires DFS to provide support staff and other assistance to task force; provides for termination of task force.

Florida

HB 1393
Signed by governor 6/25/19, Chapter 140

Requires the Division of Treasury to maintain certain warrants rather than turning them over to the Division of Accounting and Auditing; provides requirements for a combination license as funeral director and embalmer; revises the requirements for a funeral establishment and the requirements and responsibilities of a funeral director in charge; requires preneed licensees, under certain circumstances, to provide certain persons with a written notice of intent to distribute funds under the preneed contract; establishes the Florida Blockchain Task Force within the department, etc.

Florida

SB 1024
Signed by governor 5/23/19

Establishes the Florida Blockchain Task Force within the Department of Financial Services; requires the task force to develop a specified master plan; specifies duties and procedures of the task force, etc.

Georgia None  
Guam Not available  
Hawaii None  
Idaho None  
Illinois

HB 2540
Sent to governor 6/28/19

Creates the Blockchain Business Development Act. Provides that the secretary of state shall recommend legislation, including uniform laws, necessary to support the possible use of blockchain technology for public records; provides for the blockchain banking study.

Illinois

HB 3575
Sent to governor 6/27/19

Creates the Blockchain Technology Act. Provides for the permitted uses of blockchain technology in transactions and proceedings. Provides limitations to the use of blockchain technology. Prohibits units of local government from implementing specified restrictions on the use of blockchain technology. Defines terms.

Illinois HB 3577

Creates the Blockchain Technology Act. Contains only a short title provision.

Indiana None  
Iowa SF 137

Relates to electronic transactions by permitting the use of distributed ledger technology and smart contracts.

Kansas

HB 2039
Signed by governor 4/18/19, Chapter 47

The bill creates and amends law related to limited liability companies (LLCs) in the Kansas Revised Limited Liability Company Act (RLLCA), Business Entity Standard Treatment Act (BEST Act), and other statutes, as follows. Requires an LLC to maintain a current record identifying the name and last known business, residence, or mailing address of each member and manager, and to allow the use of electronic networks or databases, including distributed electronic networks or databases, to maintain records. Throughout the bill, provisions are added allowing the use of electronic networks or databases, including distributed electronic networks or databases, for certain electronic transmissions.

Kansas

HB 2105
Passed House 2/21/19

Creates and amends law related to limited liability companies (LLCs) in the Kansas Revised Limited Liability Company Act (RLLCA), Business Entity Standard Treatment Act (BEST Act), and other statutes, as follows. Requires an LLC to maintain a current record identifying the name and last known business, residence, or mailing address of each member and manager, and to allow the use of electronic networks or databases, including distributed electronic networks or databases, to maintain records. Throughout the bill, adds provisions allowing the use of electronic networks or databases, including distributed electronic networks or databases, for certain electronic transmissions.

Kentucky

HR 171
Adopted 3/14/19

Urges a comprehensive study of and subsequent plan to deal with the growing blockchain technology.

Louisiana None  
Maine LD 909

Directs the commissioner of Economic and Community Development to establish a blockchain technology working group.

Maryland

SB 136
Signed by governor 4/30/19, Chapter 288

Authorizes certain records of a corporation to be maintained by means of any information storage device, method, or electronic network or database, including a distributed electronic network or database, under certain circumstances; requires a corporation to convert a record maintained in a certain manner into a clearly legible written form on the request of any person entitled to inspect the records; authorizes certain communications, consents, and requests to be made by means of a certain electronic transmission; etc.

Massachusetts HB 3763

Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, the state secretary shall, pursuant to this act, establish a pilot program to provide for convenient voting for military personnel, their families and civilians stationed or working abroad who are allowed to register and vote under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), P.L. 99-410. The pilot program shall provide for the use of smart phones to improve voter engagement and the convenience and security of voting. The state secretary shall provide for a pilot program for integration with the state voters registration system, by a metrically secure authentication, electronic ballot delivery to smart phones, an intuitive voting experience that requires no voter training, the secure return of voted ballots in the redundant, immutable storage of ballots on a block chain infrastructure and an easy way to tabulate and consolidate the results. The pilot program shall include: (i) independent security evaluation and post-election audits; (ii) block chain infrastructure; (iii) the ability to spoil ballot, whereby a second ballot could be issued to a voter and only the voter’s last ballot would be counted; and (iv) automatic preparation of tabulatable ballots that can provide for automatically printed ballots, which can be inserted directly into a ballot tabulating machine. The state secretary shall partner with a company that has demonstrated security and capacity to deliver the requirements of the pilot program.

Massachusetts SB 200

Establishes a special commission to investigate and study the emerging technologies of blockchain and cryptocurrencies.

Michigan

HB 4103
Passed House 4/9/19

Chapter XXIVA of the Code (Credit Cards) currently defines financial transaction device as one of several specifically listed cards or an instrument or other means of access to a credit, deposit or proprietary account. This bill adds to this definition the use of cryptocurrency or distributed ledger technology to access an account.

Michigan

HB 4106
Passed House 4/9/19

Generally, a person is prohibited from falsely making, altering, forging or counterfeiting various specified kinds of records or documents, such as wills or insurance policies, with the intent to injure or defraud another person. This bill adds that this prohibition applies to a person who violates it by altering a record made utilizing distributed ledger technology.

Minnesota None  
Mississippi None  
Missouri HB 1109

This bill relates to certificate tokens, which are defined as a representation of shares that are stored in an electronic format and contains information entered into a blockchain or other secure, auditable database, linked to or associated with the certificate token, and able to be transmitted electronically to the issuing corporation, the person to whom the certificate token was issued, and any transferee. The bill requires each certificate to state on its face the name of the person to whom it is issued. Each certificate token must state the data address to which the token was issued. This bill allows the articles of incorporation or bylaws of a corporation to specify that all or a portion of the shares of the corporation may be represented by share certificates in the form of certificate tokens. The electronic message, command or transaction that transmits the certificate tokens to the data address to which a certificate token was issued shall be authorized at the time of issuance by the network signatures of two officers. For the purposes of Chapter 351, RSMo, regarding General and Business Corporations, any reference to share certificate, share, stock or share of stock shall be construed to include a certificate token. Any reference to a requirement to print information on a share certificate shall be construed to be satisfied if the information satisfies the requirements under this bill. Any reference to certificated shares or words of similar import shall be construed to include shares represented by certificate tokens, and any reference to the delivery or deposit of these shares to the corporation shall be construed to refer to any method of granting control of the tokens to the corporation. Any reference to a certificate being duly endorsed shall be construed to mean that the transaction authorizing transfer of control of the certificate token was signed by the lawful holder of the token with the network signature corresponding to the lawful holder's data address.

Montana None  
Nebraska LB 9

Prohibits cities, counties and villages from taxing or regulating distributed ledger technology.

Nebraska LR 164

The purpose of this interim study is to examine the need to update the insurance laws of Nebraska in response to technology advancement and innovation, also known as insurtech, in the insurance industry. The interim study shall include, but not be limited to, a review of the interaction of insurance regulation and artificial intelligence, blockchain, autonomous vehicles, and the Internet of things. In order to carry out the purposes of this interim study, the committee should seek the assistance of the Department of Insurance and should consider the input of interested parties, as the committee deems necessary and appropriate.

Nevada

AB 533
Signed by governor 6/12/19, Chapter 595

Revises provisions relating to cannabis. Creates the Cannabis Advisory Commission to, among others, study the feasibility of the use of emerging technologies, including, without limitation, blockchain and systems that use a single source of truth, as a means of collecting data or efficiently and effectively handling transactions electronically to reduce or eliminate the handling of cash.

Nevada

SB 162
Signed by governor 6/7/19, Chapter 474

Relates to electronic transactions; includes a public blockchain as a type of electronic record for the purposes of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act; provides that a person who uses a public blockchain to secure information does not relinquish any right of ownership related to that information; requires a governmental agency to accept a certified copy of a record in electronic form under certain circumstances; authorizes the secretary of state to adopt regulations specifying attributes required for a certified copy of a record in electronic form; prohibits a local government from taxing or imposing restrictions upon the use of a public blockchain; and provides other matters properly relating thereto.

Nevada

SB 163
Signed by governor 6/7/19, Chapter 475

Relates to business entities; revises the definition of “electronic transmission” as it relates to certain communications of certain business entities to include the use of a blockchain or public blockchain; authorizes certain business entities to store certain records on a blockchain or public blockchain; revises provisions authorizing the secretary of state to adopt regulations to define certain terms to allow certain business entities to carry out their powers and duties using the most recent technology available to include the use of blockchains or public blockchains; and provides other matters properly relating thereto.

Nevada SB 488

Relates to technology; creates the Emerging Technologies Task Force within the Department of Business and Industry; prescribes the membership of the Task Force; sets forth the powers and duties of the Task Force; authorizes the director of the Department of Business and Industry to create an Opportunity Center for Emerging Technology Businesses as part of the Office of Business Finance and Planning; and provides other matters properly relating thereto.

New Hampshire None  
New Jersey

AB 3613
Substituted 5/23/19
SB 2297
Passed Assembly 5/23/19

Establishes New Jersey Blockchain Initiative Task Force.

New Jersey

AB 3768
SB 2462

Permits corporations to use blockchain technology for certain recordkeeping requirements.

New Jersey AB 5240

This bill requires the state of New Jersey to review and approve a viable blockchain-based, digital payment platform to provide payment services to legal and licensed businesses in this state that do not have access to traditional financial services and are forced to operate in cash-only or cash-heavy environments. The purpose of the payment platform is to provide a safe, secure, and compliant system that does not exclude these businesses from participating in digital commerce. The bill requires the payment platform to provide businesses with access to cashless transactions and to secure revenue on a one-to-one basis of virtual currency to U.S. dollars. A business shall only have access to the payment platform with approval from the state. The payment platform shall provide the ability to manage and process all business expenditures and allow all transactions to be recorded on an immutable blockchain ledger. The payment platform shall facilitate regulatory compliance, provide for audits by the state, and allow for payment of sales tax to local municipalities.

New Mexico None  
New York

AB 1351
SB 6036
Passed Senate 6/18/19

Directs the state board of elections to study and evaluate the use of blockchain technology to protect voter records and election results.

New York AB 1371

Relates to establishing a task force to study and report on the potential implementation of blockchain technology in state record keeping, information storage and service delivery.

New York

AB 1398
SB 6037
Passed Senate 6/17/19

Relates to the development and creation of distributed ledger technology, which is a mathematically secured, chronological, and decentralized consensus ledger or database, whether maintained via internet interaction, peer-to-peer network, or otherwise used to authenticate, record, share and synchronize transactions in their respective electronic ledgers or databases, and business entities that develop distributed ledger technology.

New York

AB 1683
SB 4142
Passed Senate 4/9/19

Relates to allowing signatures, records and contracts secured through blockchain technology to be considered in an electronic form and to be an electronic record and signature; allows smart contracts to exist in commerce.

New York

AB 2239
SB 5060

Establishes the office of financial resilience to develop and implement new programs and initiatives for the purpose of supporting local economies and promoting resilient financial models.

North Carolina None  
North Dakota

HB 1043
Failed to pass House 1/11/19

Relates to the exemption of an open blockchain token from specified securities transactions and dealings; relates to the definitions of an open blockchain token and virtual currency and excluding an open blockchain token and virtual currency from specified money transmission requirements.

North Dakota

HB 1045
Signed by governor 4/24/19, Chapter 94

Relates to electronic transaction definitions, blockchain technology and smart contracts, number of shareholders and series limited liability companies; relates to electronic transactions, filing of an annual report by corporations engaged in farming or ranching, Business Corporation Act definitions, knowledge and notice, share certificates, corporate voting list and voting trusts.

North Dakota

HB 1048
Signed by governor 3/20/19, Chapter 469

Relates to the use of distributed ledger technologies; requires the Department of Information Technologies to research and develop the use of distributed ledger enabled platform technologies, such as blockchains, for computer-controlled programs, data transfer and storage, and program regulation to protect against falsification, improve internal data security, and identify external hacking threats.

North Dakota

HB 1049
Failed to pass House 1/9/19

Relates to signatures secured through distributed ledger technology.

North Dakota

HCR. 3002
Failed to pass House 2/8/19

Requests the legislative management to study the potential benefits of distributed ledger technology and blockchain for state government.

North Dakota

HCR 3004
Adopted 3/28/19, Chapter 539

Requests the legislative management to study the potential benefit value of blockchain technology implementation and utilization in state government administration and affairs.

N. Mariana Islands Not available  
Ohio HB 220

Enacts §9.16 of the Revised Code to allow a governmental entity to utilize distributed ledger technology, including blockchain technology.

Oklahoma

SB 700
Signed by governor 4/25/19, Chapter 177

Relates to electronic records; relates to the Uniform Electronics Transactions Act; modifies certain definitions.

Oklahoma SB 847 Relates to corporations; defines terms; clarifies number of shareholders in corporation records; requires certain written statement upon certain transfers; requires corporations to prepare certain list for notice; provides contents of list; states effect of certain shareholder information; states effect of certain shareholder information when certain information does not correspond; provides certain method of determination; authorizes the formation of a voting trust; provides method of formation.
Oregon HB 2179

Establishes the Task Force on Blockchain Applications and Legislation. Directs the task force to study and evaluate status and development of blockchain technology, investigate potential uses for blockchain technology for economic development and business transactions and make recommendations for any changes necessary in state statutes that can promote adopting, using and developing blockchain technologies.

Oregon HB 2487

Directs the Oregon Department of Administrative Services to study and make recommendations regarding the use of blockchain technology by state agencies to administer public services. Requires the department to submit report on findings by Jan. 1, 2021.

Pennsylvania None  
Puerto Rico None  
Rhode Island HB 5683

Enables the use of electronic networks and databases for corporate records.

South Carolina SB 4351 Enacts the South Carolina Blockchain Industry Empowerment Act of 2019 in order to establish this state as an incubator for tech industries seeking to develop innovation by using blockchain technology; adds §33-6-245 so as to further provide for the construction of terms relating to stock and certificate tokens; amends §33-6-250, relating to the form and content of corporate stock certificates, so as to authorize corporations to issue certificate tokens in lieu of stock certificates; adds chapter 47 to title 34 so as to provide that a person who develops, sells or facilitates the exchange of an open blockchain token is not subject to specified securities and money transmission laws, and to provide specified verification authority to the secretary of state and banking commissioner. Adds chapter 49 to title 34 so as to create the financial technology sandbox for the testing of financial products and services in South Carolina; authorizes limited waivers of specified provisions of law under certain conditions; establishes standards and procedures for sandbox applications, operations and supervision; authorizes reciprocity agreements with other regulators; requires criminal history background checks; requires the creation of financial technology innovation accounts to be used for special purposes; requires a consumer protection bond; and specifies standards for the suspension and revocation of a sandbox authorization. Adds chapter 51 to title 34 so as to specify that digital assets are property within the uniform commercial code, authorizes security interests in digital assets, establishes an opt-in framework for banks to provide custodial services for digital asset property as custodians, specifies standards and procedures for custodial services, clarifies the jurisdiction of South Carolina courts relating to digital assets, authorizes a supervision fee, and provides for other related provisions to digital assets; amends §35-11-105, relating to definitions under the South Carolina anti-money laundering act, so as to define the term "virtual currency"; and amends §35-11-110, relating to matters and transactions to which the anti-money laundering act does not apply, so as to provide that the act does not apply to buying, selling, issuing, or taking custody of payment instruments or stored value in the form of virtual currency or receiving virtual currency for transmission to a location within or outside the united states by any means.
South Carolina SB 738

Enacts the "South Carolina Blockchain Industry Empowerment Act of 2019", to establish this state as an incubator for technology industries seeking to develop innovation by using blockchain technology; amends article 2, chapter 6, title 33 of the 1976 code, relating to the issuance of shares for corporations, partnerships, and associations, by adding §33-6-245, to provide for the construction of terms relating to stock and certificate tokens; amends §33-6-250 of the 1976 code, relating to the form and content of corporate stock certificates, to authorize corporations to issue certificate tokens in lieu of stock certificates; amends title 34 of the 1976 code, relating to banking, financial institutions, and money, by adding chapter 47, to provide that a person who develops, sells, or facilitates the exchange of an open blockchain token is not subject to specified securities and money transmission laws, and to provide specified verification authority to the secretary of state and banking commissioner; amends title 34 of the 1976 code, relating to banking, financial institutions, and money, by adding chapter 49, to create the financial technology sandbox for the testing of financial products and services in South Carolina, to authorize limited waivers of specified provisions of law under certain conditions, to establish standards and procedures for sandbox applications, operations, and supervision, to authorize reciprocity agreements with other regulators, to require criminal history background checks, to require the creation of financial technology innovation accounts to be used for special purposes, to require a consumer protection bond, and to specify standards for the suspension and revocation of a sandbox authorization; amends title 34 of the 1976 code, relating to banking, financial institutions, and money, by adding chapter 51, to specify that digital assets are property within the uniform commercial code, to authorize security interests in digital assets, to establish an opt-in framework for banks to provide custodial services for digital asset property as custodians, to specify standards and procedures for custodial services, to clarify the jurisdiction of South Carolina courts relating to digital assets, to authorize a supervision fee, and to provide for other related provisions for digital assets; amends §35-11-110 of the 1976 code, relating to the applicability of the anti-money laundering act, to provide that the anti-money laundering act does not apply to the buying, selling, issuing, or taking custody of payment instruments or stored value in the form of virtual currency or receiving virtual currency for transmission to a location within or outside the United States by any means; and to define necessary terms.

South Dakota

HB 1196
Signed by governor 3/7/19, Chapter 207

Provides a definition of blockchain technology for certain purposes.

Tennessee None  
Texas

HB 3608
SB 1859
Signed by governor 6/10/19

Relates to business entities; includes a distributed electronic network or database employing blockchain or distributed ledger technology in definitions.

Texas

HB 4214
Passed House 5/1/19

Creates programs and requirements for state agencies and local governments to assess cybersecurity risks. Requires each state agency and local government would be required to consider using next-generation technologies, including cryptocurrency, blockchain technology, and artificial intelligence.

Texas HB 4517

Establishes the Texas blockchain working group.

Utah

HJR 19
Adopted 3/8/19

This resolution directs a legislative study of blockchain technology. This resolution: recognizes the potential benefits and applications of blockchain technology; and directs the Business and Labor Interim Committee to study and make legislative recommendations regarding the potential benefits and value of blockchain technology, including potential uses in state government.

Utah

SB 213
Signed by governor 3/26/19, Chapter 353

This bill enacts provisions related to blockchain technology. This bill: defines and clarifies terms related to blockchain technology; exempts a person who facilitates the creation, exchange, or sale of certain blockchain technology-related products from Title 7, Chapter 25, Money Transmitter Act; and makes technical changes.

Vermont None  
Virginia HB 1900

Establishes the Health Care Provider Credentials Data Solution Fund for the purpose of soliciting proofs of concept to establish or improve a system for the storage and accessing of health care provider credentials data, utilizing blockchain or a similar technology, to be maintained by the Department of Health Professions. The Fund authorizes the secretary of Health to disburse matching funds on at least a one-to-one basis to any person who demonstrates such proof of concept.

Virginia HB 2415

Creates a rebuttable presumption that a business record electronically registered on a blockchain is a self-authenticating document for certain facts. The bill provides that such presumption does not extend to the truthfulness, validity, or legal status of the contents of the fact or record.

Virginia HB 2588

Directs the commissioner of elections to establish and supervise a pilot program by which an active duty member of a uniformed service who has been deployed overseas and is a registered voter of a county or city participating in such pilot program may return his voted military-overseas ballot by electronic means. The commissioner is required to promulgate standards and develop procedures for the secure transmission and return, storage, and processing of voted military-overseas ballots, including security measures, methods for verifying and authenticating a voter's identity, and encryption methods for the voted ballots. To the fullest extent practicable, these standards and procedures are required to incorporate the use of blockchain technology, defined in the bill as technology using distributed databases and ledgers protected against revision by publicly verifiable open-source cryptographic algorithms and protected from data loss by distributed records sharing. The bill requires counties and cities participating in the pilot program to participate in a security review after each election. In each year of the pilot program, the bill requires the commissioner to conduct a security assessment and update the security measures for the pilot program. The bill also requires that voters eligible to return their military-overseas ballots by electronic means through the pilot program be permitted to sign the statement of voter and any other documents related to absentee voting using the digital signature associated with their respective Common Access Cards issued by the U.S. Department of Defense. The pilot program is in effect for elections held on and after Jan. 1, 2020. The bill requires the commissioner to submit a report on or before Dec. 1, 2024, on the outcomes of the pilot program and to include a recommendation as to whether to implement the electronic return of voted military-overseas ballots on a permanent, statewide basis. The bill has an expiration date of Dec. 31, 2024.

Virginia

HJR. 677
To Conference Committee 2/21/19

Establishes a 21-member joint subcommittee to identify blockchain technology research and economic development opportunities with the goal of creating a statewide, comprehensive and coordinated strategy relating to blockchain technology. In conducting its study, the joint subcommittee shall analyze and consider (i) economic development opportunities in the commonwealth available through the utilization of blockchain technology; (ii) different types of blockchain technology and the feasibility of economic development for each type; (iii) the creation of a statewide, comprehensive, coordinated strategy to encourage commercial activity in the blockchain technology sector; (iv) opportunities for deployment of blockchain technology in state government; and (v) strategies to incentivize the development of blockchain companies in the commonwealth. The joint subcommittee shall submit its report to the governor and the 2020 and 2021 regular sessions of the General Assembly.
U.S. Virgin Islands Not available  
Washington

SB 5638
Signed by governor 4/26/19, Chapter 153

Provides that an electronic record may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because it is generated or stored using distributed ledger technology.

West Virginia None  
Wisconsin None  
Wyoming

HB 1
Signed by governor with line item vetoes 2/26/19, Chapter 80

Changes the membership of the Blockchain Task Force.

Wyoming

HB 70
Signed by governor 2/26/19, Chapter 94

Relates to the secretary of state; authorizes the secretary of state to develop and implement a blockchain commercial filing system; authorizes a report; makes an appropriation.

Wyoming

HB 74
Signed by governor 2/26/19, Chapter 92

Relates to banking; makes legislative findings; creates special purpose depository banks as a new financial institution; provides that special purpose depository banks shall be corporations; requires that depositors be business entities; specifies compliance with applicable federal laws; establishes procedures for the incorporation, chartering and operation of special purpose depository bank.

Wyoming

HB 185
Signed by governor 2/26/19, Chapter 93

Relates to corporate shares and distributions; authorizes corporations to issue certificate tokens in lieu of stock certificates as specified; makes conforming amendments.

 

Powered by LexisNexis State NetLexisNexis Terms and Conditions

 

 

Heather Morton is a program principal in Fiscal Affairs. She covers financial services, alcohol production and sales, telecommunications and medical malpractice issues for NCSL.

Additional Resources