Under the new law, the Oklahoma state government cannot prohibit, restrict, or impair the use of crypto in purchases or the self-custody of crypto.
Furthermore, state and local governments cannot impose additional taxes or other charges specifically targeted at crypto. Taxes on legal tender apply.
HB 3594 also protects home crypto mining and mining businesses by declaring it legal to participate in either type of mining in Oklahoma.
Does anyone have a list of states and their policies/laws in this respect? Seems like a good "map" candidate.
I know Texas has made some laws but they seem more opaque and wishy washy compared to this Oklahoma law.
reply
Does anyone have a list of states and their policies/laws in this respect? Seems like a good "map" candidate. I know Texas has made some laws but they seem more opaque and wishy washy compared to this Oklahoma law.
https://coinpedia.org/cryptocurrency-regulation/cryptocurrency-regulation-in-the-usa/ is a really good source of information and it is relatively up to date.
reply
Fantastic thanks for adding!
reply
I need to go back through Montana has laws on the books as well. I know Texas one of its big things is that state banks can hold crypto. BTC mining is used to artificially increase the power needed on the grid to keep more power generation facilities operating.
reply
Did they turn into a bitcoin hub? I remember them talking about it quite a bit before.
reply
Not sure I have seen this but this is a good idea.
reply
I found this on Texas. As I stated it seems rather wishy washy: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/texas-law-legal-clarity-bitcoin
It would be great to see as many states as possible affirm self custody and other components.
reply
This seems like big news -- not so much bc Oklahoma is a powerhouse of btc industry, but as a precedent-setter, and a signal. Would be interested in savvier takes than mine, though.
reply
Would be nice if all states get behind this. Nationwide coverage, just like state farm lol
reply
Do you think this will set a precedent amongst red states and encourage other states to adopt similar laws?
Go Thunder!
reply
I want to say it was Montana that lead the way... or Wyoming... one of those western states kicked it off at the state level and allowed DAO's to incorporate there providing them some protections. Texas followed up with BTC and I think ETH can be held by State Banks along with their BTC mining laws/regulations that promote mining as a way to increase the amount of power needed by the grid to keep plants from going offline.
reply
You're comment was serious and thoughtful, so I am sorry for this, but I have to do it.
reply
lmaooooooooooooo its honestly to good not to post!
reply
lol! Bandwagoner. Jk jk
reply
Fair. I will accept it. However, early in the season when it was known that the Raptors season was going to be a bust I did state that my fascination this year was SGA and Chet in OKC and Edwards and KAT in Minny. @Undisciplined can vouch for me here.
Those were the two teams I wanted to follow closely so I jumped on the attention bandwagon early in the season before they were considered actual contenders.
reply
I have no recollection of that.
Weren't you constantly going on about how "OKC stinks" and "SGA's overrated"?
reply
Yes, I think I said that after you said Jimmy G was going to win MVP this year and take the Raiders to the Super Bowl. Haha.
reply
Well, you were earlier than most! I see you run StackerSports, I’m sure you keep up with a lot of unknowns. Go Thunder baby!
reply
I try to keep up. NBA is not really my forte. I am just trying to keep up with NBA gurus @Undisciplined and @gnilma so I followed it a lot this year. Prior years I was more of a Raptors fan specifically (since I used to live in Toronto) and more of a casual NBA fan broadly.
MLB and NFL are the leagues I follow closest but since the territory launched I try to stay on top of everything. Even learning and following cricket with the help of @Coinsreporter
reply
@Coinsreporter has been huge in getting me into cricket... granted I still get easily confused since be default is baseball but once work dies down next week I cant wait to stay looking into it more. Outside of Houston, TX on the way to College Station, TX they were building (this was roughly 5 years ago) the largest cricket complex I think in the world.
reply
The Blue Jays did Cricket day at the ballpark last week. They had some cricket players there and gave away cricket hats and had these areas set up with fake grass and netting where you can try out cricket batting. Maybe next year I will go to that game and I can test out my cricket skills. I have never played. Would like to try.
reply
Alright, you guys convinced me. I guess Cricket is next on the list.
I’ll have to defer to your knowledge on Baseball though! I’m sure I have much to learn from you.
reply
Great. Looking forward to having you join us chatting about sports over in the crazy part of town.
reply
That's interesting! I've known that US states can enact laws that are specific to their states, that's fine. But I wanna know if the federal law can overturn a state law?
But overall it's a huge news for Bitcoin in Oklahoma.
reply
If they want to, Feds can claim precedence in cases where the conflict involves interstate commerce. That would be easy to prove here. Still, it would be complicated and contentious. This is good news regardless.
reply
that would be easy to prove here
How and why? Suppose it's just for self custody or local trade/barter. I am curious the arguments for and against.
reply
Assuming commercial miners are operating, feds would just need to show bitcoin crossed state lines. I could envision a philosophical argument- bitcoin doesn't really "move" on the blockchain! BTW, "commerce" in this context doesn't need to involve "money",so that debate probably wouldn't even come into play. I'm not saying the feds would even challenge it. If other states follow suit, they may not. Look at how they have avoided a marijuana showdown. Of course, bitcoin may be different.
reply
Thanks. I know you're an attorney and have a much better grasp of these things.
It seems that it could be argued that almost anything falls under interstate commerce.
You grew a vegetable in your back yard -> those photons that grew your vegetable could have bounced off of the plant and hit another state had you not taken action therefore it affects interstate commerce.
Being intentionally myopic to explore the bound. I'm curious what arguments do/do not fly with respect to interstate commerce.
reply
It's been years since I even thought about this stuff, but you nailed the most commonly argued criticism of the interstate commerce clause. Just about anything can be called interstate commerce. That's why I am a Jefferson fan, and wish Hamilton had stayed in Curacou.
reply
175 sats \ 1 reply \ @cascdr 16 May
So it turns out that Wickard v Filburn has almost the precise argument I presented regarding wheat and the same can be said for Gonzalez v Raich regarding home grown cannibus.
These types of decisions make me pretty cynical when it comes to law. I mean does anybody believe that the framers of the constitution thought it would make sense for the federal government to regulate what you do on your own property with your own labor and your own crops?
reply
I suspect the government views the framers of the constitution the same way we all do Satoshi's vision.
Ya killing me I love Hamilton esp looking at him from a historical standpoint. I don't agree at all with all of his policies but things like the Federalist Papers and the way he solidified the unity of the country by combining all the states' debt into the US debt was just crazy forward thinking looking back at it now! His views compared to the lay of the land now is something I have thought about a lot because while he would likely be against something like crypto he also was someone who supported not only the US independence movement but that of Haiti as well which throws in the fun mental curveball!
reply
Okay. Hamilton was a very bright guy. He also was a visionary when it came to the way the US could grow through commerce. He also was ahead of his time with his ideas regarding slavery. On the other hand, he loved the idea of centralization. He started the first federal bank, which thankfully failed quickly. I'm a Jefferson fan, but his ideas on an agrarian economy lacked vision. I love Jefferson for his fear of a strong central government. He really believed in decentralization, and would have certainly been a bitcoiner. Hamilton would be a liberal democrat.
God imagine the absolute shit show can of worms that this would open if they claimed interstate commerce lmao... we would see a complete implosion in real time of the Federal Government fighting not only itself but also states
reply
Exactly. That's why these state laws are valuable.
reply
Is this the only state doing this? I remember Texas becoming a bitcoin hub, how did that turn out?
reply
It is booming in Texas still! They use the miners as a way to boost the amount of power needed on the grid! This then actually helps keep the grid stable and prevent the issues that occurred in Feb 2020!
reply
Thats awesome. Does texas still have that private company running its electric grid?
reply
oooooof okay how much do you know about the Texas grid lol
reply
I know a little bit... I know it really failed during a snow storm a few years back.
reply
All righty! Okay so Texas' Grid is run by ERCOT a 501c not a private company and they oversee the powerplants and coordinate when some are offline for maintenance and such. In Feb. 2020 a cascade of issues hit the state at once. When dealing with the electric load (power on the grid) its a super delicate thing... you cant have to much power on the lines if there isn't a need or the grid will collapse and if to much power is needed the opposite can happen.
During the freeze, two huge things happened. The first one was the freezing temps going as far south as they did and how long they lasted. It froze the LNG pipelines that fed the power plants and while up in Dallas that was just pure stupidity in the Rio Grande Valley these temps were not in any sort of plan. The second thing was the wind turbines froze. Now if you are like me you go well they have them in the north and midwest and they are fine so what made the ones in Texas freeze.... come to find out they literally discovered simply speaking a new form of ice that only happens in very specific climates like Texas. Even with the freeze, there was high humidity so this unique kind of ice crystals formed that no one knew would form on wind turbines.
Once the freeze passed there were limited options to quickly fix the grid. Since the grid failure was caused by a sudden spike in power needs the grid needed a solution that could suck the hell out of power really artificially increasing the power needs. Guess what fits that bill! BTC mining! While others talked about and to a point are still pursuing data centers the issue with them is that Texas needed something that Could also turn off and data centers cant really do that without causing damage to the systems.
BTC thus continues to be the best and easiest fix to address these swings. The state pays them in electrical credits to turn off and the companies have made hella money doing so. Since the freeze there have been several storms/weather events that have required even more power than during that freeze and the grid has been fine! It really is a fantastic solution at least when it comes to Texas!
reply
okay, I see. Thats a lot of information. So it is actually better now with the miners.
reply
Yep! Due to how renewables froze up and shut down with wind and solar additional generation while helpful wouldn't have really fixed anything due to how it was a sudden spike in power needs. Miners fill a gap of creating demand and being able to be flipped off like a light switch!
Man if it weren't for the tornadoes, I'd be there in a second.
reply
Lol I get that! I feel like within the US it is take your pick of what natural disaster you want! Being from Houston it was kinda uber crap with flood, hurricane, andddddd tornados lol
reply
great find!!!!
reply
Helps when your boss is a Congressman from Oklahoma! Gotta pay attention to what they do overthere!
reply
So now we support shitcoins when we think the language benefits us?
This is crypto law, not Bitcoin.
Is Bitcoin crypto now? Because the narrative used to be that Bitcoin and crypto are different. So why are you people celebrating? Because you think this is Bitcoins "trojan horse" moment?
These politicians are smart and you are rubes for celebrating this. Anything that targets crypto is fundamentally anti-bitcoin.
reply
Sometimes I wonder what led us down the path of idiocy and then I see takes like this which show how far the education system has fallen. Starting off at the most basic basic level this bill directly states Bitcoin is protected so boom bam whadda wam its fine. Second and a little bit higher thinking than I think you are used to or can do... Laws get nuked all the time in the US for creating favoritism. If you want to protect BTC you have to protect crypto you cannot exclude others from protection without lawsuits and then the law being struck down.
reply
Except... bitcoin and shitcoins ARE different. Looking at the Howey test: for example eth is clearly a security imo. Bitcoin clearly is not.
reply
You might thing a 1939 law links with ETH if you want but I don't. I see ETH almost as an internet of sorts but the internet isn't a security. Both require things to operate within them and esp in the internet's founding it was hella expensive to have internet those AOL free trial CD's were practically gold.
reply
However, that being said, I would basically abolish securities law too, so...
reply
The law ought to protect Bitcoin and shitcoins alike. Equality before the law is essential for Bitcoin's long term success. Let the market kill the shitcoins, not the politicians
reply
I think it is funny how this is being defended when it is loose lipped laws like this that allow for 6102 attacks that specifically target Bitcoin later.
This is powerfully short sighted mentality. When they do decide to target Bitcoin, they are going to say "Well, even the Bitcoiners say it is different, so we should attempt to ban it"
It is important to make clear and specific law, anything less is lazy and unjustified unless you're an unaccountable weasel.
reply
They flip flop on the content they decide is real BTC or not, no big deal, lol.
reply
Is Bitcoin crypto now?
From a legal POV? Yes. Otherwise, you need the politicians to craft a law that distinguishes the two. Sure, you could have proof of work and decentralized inserted into the definition, but even there you won't eliminate all the coins out there. And the law could give a shit about being first or the network effect or any of that.
And whatever you think about shitcoins, if you're opposed to government interference and support free speech, that means in all cases, not just for things you like. Otherwise, those aren't principals, just word.
reply
It blows my mind how people cannot understand exactly what you said. The law of the land at the end of the day has to be equal and not create favoritism or it ends up in court and eventually gets struck down. By protecting crypto you protect BTC and alts. If you hate shitcoins/alts/etc then just don't by them but why on Gods green earth would people rather them not protect BTC because of it is beyond me.
reply