Crypto Gains State-Level Support As South Carolina Bans Federal CBDCs

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-05-21Última atualização em 2026-05-21

Resumo

South Carolina has joined over a dozen U.S. states in enacting legislation to protect cryptocurrency rights. Governor Henry McMaster signed Senate Bill 163, which passed with near-unanimous support. The law prohibits state agencies from accepting or requiring payments in a Federal Reserve-issued central bank digital currency (CBDC) or participating in related pilot programs, though privately issued stablecoins like USDC remain permitted. Beyond the CBDC ban, the legislation establishes a broad framework for digital assets. It protects the right of individuals and businesses to accept cryptocurrencies as payment, formally recognizes self-hosted wallets, and prevents discriminatory taxation on digital asset transactions. The law also provides legal protections for crypto mining operations against unfair local regulations and exempts certain activities like node operation and staking services from money transmitter licensing. It includes consumer protection measures, allowing the state Attorney General to prosecute fraud in staking or mining services.

South Carolina is now one of more than a dozen US states that have passed laws protecting cryptocurrency rights — and it did so with almost no pushback.

Governor Henry McMaster signed Senate Bill 163 on May 19, adding it to a growing stack of state-level digital asset laws that have quietly moved through Republican-controlled legislatures across the country.

A Near-Unanimous Vote That Signals Shifting Ground

The bill cleared the South Carolina Senate 38-1, a margin that says more than the law itself. Filed in January 2025, it spent 17 months working through the legislative process — passing the Senate in May of that year, getting reconciled with House amendments in April 2026, and landing on the governor’s desk this month.

Senators Daniel Verdin and Matthew Leber sponsored the bill. It now adds a new Chapter 47 to Title 34 of the South Carolina Code of Laws, laying out one of the more detailed state-level crypto frameworks in the country.

The law prohibits state government agencies from accepting or requiring payments in a central bank digital currency. It also bars those agencies from joining any Federal Reserve CBDC pilot or testing program.

But the definition matters: the bill describes a CBDC as a digital currency issued directly by the US Federal Reserve or a federal agency. Privately issued stablecoins backed by legal tender or government treasuries — such as USDC — fall outside that definition and remain permitted under state law.

BTCUSD now trading at $77,467. Chart: TradingView

What The Law Actually Covers

Beyond the CBDC ban, S.163 covers a wide range of crypto activity. Individuals and businesses are protected from being blocked from accepting digital assets as payment for legal goods and services.

Self-hosted and hardware wallets are formally recognized, allowing users to hold their own assets without government interference. State and local governments are also barred from taxing digital asset payments at higher rates than other payment types.

The law’s definition of digital assets is broad, covering cryptocurrencies, stablecoins, fungible tokens, non-fungible tokens, and other digital-only assets that carry economic, proprietary, or access rights.

Crypto mining operations also get legal cover. Local governments cannot impose unfair zoning rules, excessive noise restrictions, or regulations that single out mining businesses.

Node operations, blockchain software development, staking services, and mining activities are exempt from money transmitter license requirements under certain conditions.

Staking-as-a-service and mining-as-a-service providers will not automatically be classified as securities issuers under state law.

At the same time, the South Carolina Attorney General retains authority to prosecute fraud involving anyone who falsely claims to offer those services — a consumer protection measure built directly into the law.

Featured image from Pexels, chart from TradingView

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main purpose of the South Carolina Senate Bill 163, recently signed by Governor Henry McMaster?

AThe main purpose of South Carolina Senate Bill 163 is to establish a detailed state-level framework for digital assets. Its key provisions include prohibiting state government agencies from accepting or requiring payments in a Federal Reserve central bank digital currency (CBDC), banning state agencies from participating in any Federal Reserve CBDC pilot programs, and protecting various cryptocurrency-related rights and activities for individuals and businesses.

QHow does the South Carolina law define a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), and what does it exclude from this definition?

AThe South Carolina law defines a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) as a digital currency that is issued directly by the U.S. Federal Reserve or a federal agency. It specifically excludes privately issued stablecoins that are backed by legal tender or government treasuries, such as USDC, from this definition. These privately issued stablecoins remain permitted under the state law.

QWhat specific protections does the law provide for individuals and businesses regarding cryptocurrency?

AThe law provides several protections for individuals and businesses. It prohibits state and local governments from blocking them from accepting digital assets as payment for legal goods and services. It formally recognizes self-hosted and hardware wallets, allowing users to hold their assets without government interference. It also bars governments from taxing digital asset payments at a higher rate than other forms of payment.

QWhat legal protections does the law offer to crypto mining operations and related activities in South Carolina?

AThe law offers legal protections to crypto mining operations by prohibiting local governments from imposing unfair zoning rules, excessive noise restrictions, or regulations that specifically target mining businesses. Furthermore, it exempts node operations, blockchain software development, staking services, and mining activities from money transmitter license requirements under certain conditions. Providers of staking-as-a-service and mining-as-a-service are also not automatically classified as securities issuers under state law.

QWho sponsored the bill, and how did it perform in the South Carolina Senate vote?

AThe bill was sponsored by Senators Daniel Verdin and Matthew Leber. It passed the South Carolina Senate with an overwhelmingly supportive margin of 38 votes to 1, signaling strong bipartisan or broad legislative support for its provisions.

Leituras Relacionadas

Standing in the Light: A Comprehensive Guide to the Optical Module and CPO Supply Chain

"Standing in the Light: Understanding the Optical Module and CPO Industry Chain" This article analyzes the critical role of optical communication technology, specifically optical modules and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO), as the "nervous system" for modern AI data centers. With exponential growth in AI computational demands (e.g., NVIDIA's Vera Rubin architecture), traditional electrical interconnects using copper cables face severe bottlenecks in bandwidth, power consumption, and signal integrity over distance. The core function of an optical module is to act as a "translator," converting electrical signals from chips into optical signals for transmission over fiber (and vice-versa). Key internal components include lasers, modulators, photodetectors, drivers, and DSP chips. The industry is currently transitioning from 800G to 1.6T modules. However, the future lies in CPO. This next-generation technology integrates the optical engine directly with the switch ASIC/XPU on the same package substrate, drastically reducing power consumption (by ~3.5x according to NVIDIA), overcoming bandwidth density limits, and minimizing signal attenuation compared to traditional pluggable modules. Key challenges for CPO include advanced packaging capacity (dominated by TSMC), thermal management, repairability, and standardization. The article details the broader technology landscape, including Near-Packaged Optics (NPO, a pragmatic intermediate step), Linear-drive Pluggable Optics (LPO), Optical I/O (OIO for chip-level integration), and Optical Circuit Switches (OCS). A comprehensive CPO industry chain is mapped, highlighting shifting power dynamics: * **Architecture Definers:** NVIDIA, Broadcom, and Marvell now hold greater influence. * **Advanced Packaging & Manufacturing:** TSMC is central; Fabrinet is a key EMS player. * **Lasers ("The Heart"):** A strategic bottleneck. EML lasers are led by Lumentum and Coherent (both receiving major NVIDIA investments). CW lasers, favored for CPO/silicon photonics, see strong Chinese players like Source Photonics and Sicoya. * **Silicon Photonics Chips:** The mainstream path for CPO engines, with key players like Broadcom, Intel, Marvell, and China's Accelink. * **Fiber Connectivity Components:** A major new, high-growth market created by CPO, including Fiber Array Units (FAU), Polarization-Maintaining Fiber (PMF), and MPO connectors. Companies like Tianfu Communication and US Conec are leaders. * **Fiber & Cable:** Experiencing a super-cycle (e.g., Corning, Yangtze Optical Fiber). * **PCB/Substrates:** Requiring advanced materials (e.g., Shengyi Tech). * **DSP & SerDes:** Functions are integrated into switch ASICs in the CPO era (e.g., Broadcom, Astera Labs). * **Optical Module Makers:** Transitioning from standalone module suppliers to providers of optical engines and NPO/LPO solutions while riding the current pluggable boom (e.g., Zhongji Innolight, Eoptolink). The investment timeline is segmented: Short-term (2026-2027) features the "last feast" for pluggable modules and CPO's initial rollout. Medium-term (2027-2029) will see CPO expand and NPO peak. Long-term (2029-2032+) involves CPO/OIO penetration into intra-rack scaling. In conclusion, optical interconnects are fundamental to AI infrastructure. The competitive landscape sees US firms leading in architecture and high-end chips, TSMC in advanced packaging, and Chinese firms holding strong positions in modules, connectivity components, CW lasers, and fiber/cable. The future belongs to companies that can navigate the technological shift from "selling shovels" (modules) to "building highways" (CPO/OIO infrastructure).

marsbitHá 4m

Standing in the Light: A Comprehensive Guide to the Optical Module and CPO Supply Chain

marsbitHá 4m

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片