A BILL TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY ADDING ARTICLE 17 TO CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 1 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN GOLD AND SILVER SPECIE ARE LEGAL TENDER IN THIS STATE, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE STATE COMPTROLLER GENERAL TO ESTABLISH ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS, CONTRACT WITH VENDORS, AND ADOPT RULES TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT.
H5115 would add a new article to the South Carolina Code declaring that certain gold and silver specie meeting specified marking requirements are legal tender in the state, to the extent permitted by the U.S. Constitution. The bill defines the physical characteristics of qualifying specie, including required markings for weight and purity and limits on other markings, and it makes clear that the measure does not alter the status of U.S. coins, federally recognized currency, or Federal Reserve notes. It also states that no person may be required to accept gold or silver specie or gold- and silver-backed currency for payment, deposit, or any other purpose.
The bill further authorizes the State Comptroller General to create or approve electronic systems for payments backed by gold and silver bullion held in depositories, contract with vendors to implement the program, and adopt rules governing security, valuation, fees, vendor approval, fraud prevention, and restrictions involving foreign adversaries. The act would take effect upon the Governor’s approval.
If enacted, H5115 would amend Title 1 of the South Carolina Code by creating a new legal framework for gold and silver specie as state-recognized legal tender and by assigning administrative authority to the Comptroller General. It would not displace federal currency law or require private parties to accept precious metals, but it would open the door to state-regulated payment systems using bullion-backed currency and related electronic transfer mechanisms. The bill would also create new rulemaking, vendor contracting, and compliance responsibilities for the Comptroller General, including security and anti-fraud standards.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears to be supportive or at least exploratory toward expanding the role of gold and silver in state payments. The bill is framed as an enabling measure rather than a mandate, which suggests an effort to make precious-metal transactions available without forcing participation. No recorded opposition, amendments, or roll-call votes are included in the available context.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be constitutional and practical rather than procedural. The bill repeatedly limits itself to what is authorized under federal law, signaling sensitivity to preemption and legal-tender issues, while also preserving the continued use of Federal Reserve notes and U.S. currency. Another likely area of debate is implementation: the Comptroller General would need to establish valuation methods, fees, vendor standards, transaction security, and safeguards against fraud and foreign-adversary involvement. Some stakeholders may also object to the need for a state-run or state-authorized precious-metals payment infrastructure, while supporters may view it as a monetary choice and economic diversification measure.