AN ACT to create and enact sections 13-09.1-50, 13-09.1-51, 13-09.1-52, 13-09.1-53, and 13-09.1-54 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to virtual-currency kiosks; and to amend and reenact section 13-09.1-44 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to virtual-currency kiosks.
HB 1447 creates a new regulatory framework for virtual-currency kiosks in North Dakota and amends the state’s money transmitter law to cover these machines. The bill defines key terms such as virtual currency, virtual-currency kiosk, virtual-currency kiosk operator, blockchain analytics, and related transaction concepts, then requires kiosk operators to be licensed as money transmitters if they engage in virtual-currency business activity. It also sets standards for kiosk placement, reporting, disclosures, receipts, fraud prevention, customer service, and transaction limits.
The bill requires operators to provide prominent consumer warnings about scams, irreversibility of transactions, volatility, and the lack of government insurance or legal-tender status for virtual currency. Operators must disclose fees, exchange rates, transaction details, law-enforcement contacts, and refund policies, and must provide receipts with transaction hashes and unique identifiers useful for fraud investigations. The bill also requires operators to use blockchain analytics, maintain antifraud and enhanced due-diligence policies, and employ full-time compliance and consumer protection officers.
HB 1447 limits cash or equivalent virtual-currency transactions to $2,000 per customer per day across kiosks operated by the same operator in the state. It further requires kiosks to be located in commercially accessible, accessible, and security-monitored areas, and mandates quarterly reporting of kiosk locations and associated virtual-currency addresses to the commissioner. Operators must also provide live customer service on weekdays during specified hours.
The bill’s impact is to expand North Dakota’s money transmission and consumer-protection rules to a specific segment of the cryptocurrency market, especially bitcoin ATMs and similar kiosk-based services. It imposes licensing, operational, disclosure, and anti-fraud obligations on kiosk operators and gives the commissioner additional oversight tools. Consumers using virtual-currency kiosks would face more warnings and limits, while operators would face higher compliance costs and more detailed reporting and staffing requirements.
The overall sentiment appears strongly supportive, as reflected in the large bipartisan vote margins in both chambers. The bill passed the House and Senate with only a small number of dissenting votes, suggesting broad agreement that virtual-currency kiosks present fraud and consumer-risk concerns that warrant regulation. The discussion context provided does not include committee debate, but the structure of the bill indicates a consumer-protection and anti-fraud emphasis rather than a permissive approach to crypto kiosks.
HB 1447 amends Chapter 13-09.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, expanding the state’s money transmitter framework to regulate virtual-currency kiosks and related business activity. It creates new statutory sections governing licensing, disclosures, fraud prevention, transaction limits, customer service, and reporting, and it revises the definitions section to add terms used in the new regulatory scheme. The bill directly affects virtual-currency kiosk operators, money transmitters, consumers using kiosks to buy or sell virtual currency, and the commissioner responsible for enforcement and oversight.
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and a generally favorable reception. It passed the House and Senate by wide margins, with only a handful of no votes in each chamber, indicating that most legislators agreed with the need to address fraud, consumer confusion, and money-laundering risks associated with virtual-currency kiosks. The vote pattern suggests the bill was viewed as a practical consumer-protection measure rather than a controversial restriction on cryptocurrency use.
The main points of contention likely center on the scope of regulation imposed on virtual-currency kiosk operators. The bill requires licensing as money transmitters, mandatory use of blockchain analytics, full-time compliance and consumer protection officers, detailed disclosures, and a strict $2,000 daily transaction cap, all of which could be seen as burdensome by industry stakeholders. Potential concerns also include whether the transaction limit is too restrictive for legitimate users, whether the disclosure and staffing requirements are costly for smaller operators, and whether the state is imposing a regulatory model that may be more stringent than in other jurisdictions. The strong vote totals suggest these concerns did not generate major legislative opposition.