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

bitcoinistОпубліковано о 2026-05-21Востаннє оновлено о 2026-05-21

Анотація

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

Пов'язані питання

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.

Пов'язані матеріали

Seeking Alpha's Hot Article: Why Might the U.S. Stock Market Crash in June?

In a recent Seeking Alpha article, financial professor and analyst Damir Tokic argues that the US stock market may be poised for a significant crash in June 2026. The core thesis centers on a "mega-bubble" in equities, particularly within the technology sector, which has driven the S&P 500 to near-record valuations, with a Shiller P/E ratio exceeding 40—a level comparable to the 2000 dot-com bubble. Tokic identifies two primary catalysts for a potential collapse. First, he points to unsustainable market exuberance fueled by what he terms the "Trump Stimulus"—massive AI capital expenditure by tech giants, which he believes is politically driven and cannot last. Second, and more urgently, he highlights the escalating Iran war as a critical threat. The ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz has created a severe global energy supply crunch. Strategic petroleum reserves are projected to hit critically low operational levels by June, potentially causing oil prices to spike above $200 per barrel and triggering a severe, supply-driven inflationary shock. This scenario, Tokic warns, would force the Federal Reserve's hand. Despite currently maintaining a dovish bias, the Fed would likely be compelled to officially pivot to a hawkish stance at its June FOMC meeting to combat soaring inflation and bond yields. He contends that such a shift—or even a failure to act, which would destroy Fed credibility—could be the trigger that punctures the market bubble. The resulting downturn, he concludes, could rival the bear markets of 2000 and 2008, advising investors to prepare for a major correction.

marsbit15 хв тому

Seeking Alpha's Hot Article: Why Might the U.S. Stock Market Crash in June?

marsbit15 хв тому

AI PC Battle: Bet on the Toll Booth, Not the Camp

**Title:** The AI PC Battle: Don't Bet on Sides, Bet on the Tollbooth **Summary:** The AI PC competition is moving beyond simple "x86 vs. Arm" narratives. The core investment thesis should focus on identifying which players can sustain margins, cash flow, and pricing power throughout the upgrade cycle, rather than backing a particular architecture. The opportunity is analyzed in three layers: 1. **The Advanced Foundry Tollbooth:** TSMC is positioned to collect "tolls" regardless of which chip designer wins, due to its dominant ~70% share in advanced semiconductor manufacturing, which is essential for high-end AI PC chips. 2. **Compute & Platform Spillover:** AMD represents an offensive in the x86 CPU+GPU space, while NVIDIA leverages its GPU and CUDA software stack dominance. Both benefit from the demand for increased local AI compute. 3. **Architecture Diffusion & Turnaround Plays:** ARM and Intel offer potential for significant upside (elasticity), but investments here require stricter discipline due to higher execution risks and competitive challenges. The industry is transitioning from concept to shipment validation. While short-term forecasts for AI PC adoption have been revised down slightly due to tariffs and procurement delays, the long-term trend towards AI becoming a standard PC feature remains intact. The key driver for upgrade cycles will be whether compelling enterprise applications (e.g., privacy-sensitive computing, low-latency inference) emerge beyond consumer-focused features like meeting summarization. Investment strategy should prioritize companies with platform-level advantages and recurring revenue streams. TSMC offers high certainty as the foundational tollbooth. AMD presents a strong offensive play within the established ecosystem. ARM and Intel are higher-risk, higher-potential-reward turnaround bets. The report cautions against chasing short-term hype and emphasizes a disciplined, long-term approach focused on buying ecosystem strength and cash-flow certainty after market enthusiasm subsides. **Key Risks:** Underwhelming AI PC applications slowing upgrade cycles; slow improvement in Windows on Arm compatibility; macro/tariff impacts on PC demand; potential advanced node supply-demand mismatches affecting TSMC; high overall AI sector valuations making stocks vulnerable to a risk-off shift in markets.

marsbit30 хв тому

AI PC Battle: Bet on the Toll Booth, Not the Camp

marsbit30 хв тому

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

Marvell Technology's stock price surged from under $10 in 2016 to a record $290 in June 2026, fueled not by making GPUs, but by dominating AI infrastructure connectivity. This analysis argues the market misvalues MRVL as merely a smaller Broadcom in custom AI chips, overlooking its true, unique position. Marvell's core strength lies in enabling high-speed data flow for AI clusters through three interconnected businesses. First, it holds a commanding ~70% market share in high-speed optical DSPs (essential for data center light modules), a deep-moat business with accelerating growth. Second, its custom AI chip design business serves hyperscalers like AWS, Microsoft, and Google, with a significant revenue pipeline despite lower margins. Third, stable cash flows come from Ethernet switch chips and enterprise storage controllers. Together, they form a full-stack "AI data movement" platform. CEO Matt Murphy's transformative leadership since 2016, involving strategic divestments, key acquisitions (like Inphi for optical DSPs), and securing long-term agreements with major cloud providers, repositioned the company. A pivotal $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA in 2026 underscored Marvell's critical role in the AI ecosystem, particularly through collaborations like NVLink Fusion. While Marvell faces risks—including client concentration (losing the Amazon Trainium3 design), lower-margin business mix, competitive threats, insider selling, and complex supply chains—its fundamentals remain strong. The optical interconnect moat is widening with the acquisition of Celestial AI (photonics fabric), and financial metrics show accelerating revenue growth and operating leverage. With a PEG ratio suggesting undervaluation relative to its growth, the thesis is that the market undervalues Marvell's monopolistic position in AI "plumbing" while overemphasizing its competitive custom chip segment. The story transcends investing, symbolizing how in any complex system—from the internet to AI—the value of "connection" ultimately surpasses that of individual "nodes."

marsbit59 хв тому

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

marsbit59 хв тому

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

A discussion on Zhihu about "AI relay stations" shifted the niche developer topic of "cheap tokens" into broader user awareness. Users moved beyond simply questioning the legitimacy of these services to focus on practical concerns: Where do cheap tokens truly come from? Is the model being accessed the real one? Can relay stations see prompts, code, and API keys? For occasional users, are the risks worth it? The core debate centered less on price and more on trust. A primary worry is model authenticity—the risk of "model swapping," where users paying for a premium model might be routed to a cheaper one, creating an information asymmetry. Others argued that cost comparisons matter; while cheaper than official pay-as-you-go APIs, relay stations may not be the lowest-cost option versus subscriptions, domestic models, or free tiers, making user needs assessment crucial. Speculation about token sources ranged from legitimate bulk discounts to gray-area methods like account sharing or exploiting regional pricing. This opacity makes risk assessment difficult for users. Data security emerged as a critical concern, especially for enterprise use. When processing sensitive information like code, contracts, or client data, the inability to verify a relay station's data handling, retention, or access policies poses significant compliance and confidentiality risks. The evolving consensus suggests relay stations can be used cautiously for low-sensitivity, disposable tasks (e.g., summarizing public info, simple translation). However, they should not be the default for sensitive, professional, or production workflows involving proprietary data, Agents, or automated systems. Recommendations include avoiding large prepayments, not relying on a single service, using test prompts to monitor quality, anonymizing data where possible, and keeping official channels as backups. Ultimately, the discussion framed tokens not just as a billing unit but as a measure of real cost encompassing price, model integrity, data security, and service stability. The popularity of relay stations highlights user demand for affordable access, but the debate underscores a key trade-off: the savings from cheap tokens may come at the price of trust, transparency, and control over one's data and AI experience.

marsbit1 год тому

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片