Minnesota Moves to Ban Crypto Kiosks Over Fraud

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-02-27Last updated on 2026-02-27

Abstract

Minnesota lawmakers are advancing a bill, House File 3642, to ban all cryptocurrency kiosks in the state. This action follows law enforcement testimony linking these machines to a significant increase in elder fraud cases. Officials cited instances where elderly victims lost substantial savings, with one individual sending half her monthly income to scammers. Despite 2024 regulations that imposed consumer protections like disclosure requirements and a $2,000 daily transaction limit, these measures were deemed insufficient to prevent fraud. The proposed ban targets physical kiosks but would not affect online cryptocurrency transactions. This move aligns with a broader national and international trend of increasing oversight on crypto kiosks due to fraud concerns.

Minnesota lawmakers are advancing legislation that would prohibit cryptocurrency kiosks across the state. The proposal follows testimony from law enforcement officials who linked the machines to a surge in elder fraud cases.

Representative Erin Koegel introduced House File 3642 earlier this week. The bill seeks to ban the placement and operation of any virtual currency kiosk in Minnesota. Lawmakers would repeal nearly two dozen statutory provisions that currently regulate the industry.

Koegel told the House Commerce, Finance, and Policy Committee that officers have identified kiosks as a prime tool for scammers targeting vulnerable residents.

Law Enforcement Details Elder Fraud Impact

Woodbury Police Detective Lynn Lawrence described cases in which elderly residents lost significant portions of their savings. One victim on a fixed income completed at least 10 Bitcoin transactions over six months. She sent roughly half of her monthly income to scammers.

Lawrence stated that the victim ultimately required assistance from adult protection services. The woman feared she would lose her housing due to the financial losses.

The Minnesota Department of Commerce reported 70 kiosk-related complaints last year, totaling $540,000 in reported losses. Approximately 48% of affected consumers received partial refunds, averaging 16% of the total loss.

Minnesota currently hosts about 350 licensed kiosks operated by eight to ten companies.

2024 Safeguards Deemed Insufficient

The state introduced regulatory laws in 2024 to control fraud. The laws required the operators to disclose that cryptocurrency is not legal tender and that the transaction is irreversible. The law also required a $2,000 daily limit for new customers and a full refund in specified fraud conditions.

It is now argued that the measures have not prevented scams. Sam Smith, government relations director at the Minnesota Department of Commerce, stated that prior consumer protection efforts have not delivered sufficient results.

House File 3642 would repeal the existing regulatory framework entirely. The ban applies specifically to physical kiosks. Residents would still retain access to online cryptocurrency transactions.

Wider National and International Crackdown

Minnesota’s plan is in line with the regulatory movement. In August, Illinois passed the Digital Asset Kiosk Act, requiring registration of operators, real-time customer support, and a maximum 18% transaction fee.

Globally, New Zealand introduced a country-wide ban on cryptocurrency ATMs in July 2025 as part of anti-money laundering regulations. In Australia, regulators have also moved to broaden their powers to control high-risk financial services, such as crypto kiosks.

Regulators are now recognizing crypto access points as possible sources of fraud. Some argue that education and regulation could be more effective than banning kiosks.

Minnesota lawmakers will continue debating the proposal in committee. If enacted, the state would join a growing list of jurisdictions tightening oversight of cryptocurrency kiosks in response to fraud concerns.

Highlighted Crypto News:

MetaMask Card Goes Live in the U.S., Enabling Crypto Payments with On-Chain Rewards

TagsBitcoin ATMCrypto Bancrypto fraudCrypto Lawpolicy

Related Questions

QWhy are Minnesota lawmakers proposing to ban cryptocurrency kiosks?

AMinnesota lawmakers are proposing to ban cryptocurrency kiosks because law enforcement officials have linked them to a significant increase in elder fraud cases, where scammers have used the machines to target vulnerable residents.

QWhat was the financial impact of kiosk-related fraud reported by the Minnesota Department of Commerce last year?

AThe Minnesota Department of Commerce reported 70 kiosk-related complaints last year, totaling $540,000 in reported losses.

QWhat specific safeguards did Minnesota introduce in 2024 to control crypto kiosk fraud, and why are they considered insufficient?

AIn 2024, Minnesota introduced laws requiring operators disclose that cryptocurrency is not legal tender, that transactions are irreversible, impose a $2,000 daily limit for new customers, and provide a full refund in specified fraud conditions. They are deemed insufficient because they have not prevented scams, according to testimony from the Minnesota Department of Commerce.

QHow does the proposed ban in Minnesota fit into a larger regulatory trend?

AMinnesota's proposed ban is part of a wider national and international crackdown. For example, Illinois passed the Digital Asset Kiosk Act with new registration and fee rules, New Zealand implemented a country-wide ban on crypto ATMs, and Australia is broadening its powers to control high-risk financial services like crypto kiosks.

QIf the ban is enacted, will Minnesota residents lose all access to buying cryptocurrency?

ANo, the ban applies specifically to physical kiosks. Residents would still have access to online cryptocurrency transactions.

Related Reads

Meta: Can Afford Trillion-Dollar Computing Power, But Can't Keep Key People

Meta's AI Ambition: A $135 Billion Bet on Chips, But Losing Key Talent In July 2025, Meta recruited top AI infrastructure engineer Ruoming Pang from Apple with a compensation package worth over $200 million. However, just seven months later, he left for OpenAI, forfeiting much of his unvested equity. This high-profile departure is part of a broader trend of key talent leaving Meta's AI division, including Chief AI Scientist Yann LeCun and other senior figures. The exodus is largely attributed to the fallout from the Llama 4 model's release in April 2025. The model was later revealed to have been benchmarked unethically, using different model versions to optimize scores on different tests, severely damaging trust within the developer community. This scandal led CEO Mark Zuckerberg to lose confidence in the team, resulting in a major reorganization. He appointed 28-year-old Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang as Chief AI Officer, who now oversees the new Meta Superintelligent Lab (MSL). The planned flagship model, Llama 4 Behemoth, was indefinitely delayed. Compounding these software issues, Meta also canceled its most advanced in-house AI training chip project, a critical part of its plan to reduce reliance on Nvidia. This failure has triggered a panic-buying spree. In February 2026, Meta announced a capital expenditure budget of $115-$135 billion, nearly double the previous year's. Within ten days, it signed massive, multi-year chip deals: a multi-billion dollar agreement with Nvidia for Blackwell and Vera Rubin GPUs, a $60-$100 billion deal with AMD for MI450 GPUs (which included warrants for a 10% stake), and a multi-billion dollar deal to rent Google's TPU chips. This strategy of acquiring immense, diverse hardware from three different architectures (CUDA, ROCm, XLA/JAX) creates immense engineering complexity. Ironically, Meta is spending hundreds of billions on the world's most complex hardware while losing the rare engineers, like Pang, capable of building the cross-platform frameworks needed to make it all work. Zuckerberg's gamble mirrors his all-in bet on the metaverse: see a trend, spend heavily, reorganize frequently. The difference is that AI is a more tangible opportunity, and Meta's core advertising business generates massive cash flow to fund it. However, the article concludes that money can buy chips and算力, but it cannot guarantee the retention of top talent or the development of a winning model. If Meta's next model, codenamed "Avocado," fails to compete with GPT-5 and Gemini 3 Ultra, its massive expenditure will have only built expensive data centers full of underutilized hardware. The AI race is won by those who can build transformative models, not just those who can write the biggest checks.

marsbit1h ago

Meta: Can Afford Trillion-Dollar Computing Power, But Can't Keep Key People

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片