AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 9; Title 45, Chapter 2 and Title 67, relative to precious metals.
SB0985 would create the “Tennessee Bullion Depository Act” and establish a framework for the state to recognize, store, and report on precious metals holdings. It authorizes depositories to operate as private precious-metals custodians for bullion and specie held by the state, local governments, or private parties, and requires annual reporting to the commissioner of financial institutions with audit oversight by the comptroller. The commissioner would also be required to adopt rules to implement the new part.
The bill also makes major changes to Tennessee’s treatment of gold and silver coinage. It would require gold and silver coins to be accepted as legal tender at spot price for debts contracted in the state, while also stating that no one is required to use them and that federal reserve notes remain acceptable. It further directs state tax officials to accept gold and silver coinage for taxes and other amounts owed to the state, requires the state to purchase such coinage at spot price plus verification costs, and provides that gold and silver received by the state be stored in a depository and counted toward the reserve for revenue fluctuations until other reserve funds are exhausted. Finally, the bill directs the state treasurer to work toward establishing a state reserve banking system to support state-chartered banks.
In practical terms, the bill would amend Tennessee law in Title 9, Title 45, and Title 67 to create a new regulatory and operational structure for precious metals in state finance. It would affect depository institutions, the commissioner of financial institutions, the comptroller, the state treasurer, tax collection officials, and any private or public party choosing to transact in gold or silver coinage. The bill also appears to interact with existing laws on seizure, banking, and administrative rulemaking, while expressly preserving the use of federal reserve notes.
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so no direct legislative debate or formal vote sentiment is available. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a favorable view of precious metals as a parallel payment and reserve mechanism, but it also introduces significant administrative and financial implementation requirements. Because the bill would alter how taxes, debts, and state reserves can be handled, likely points of concern would include valuation at spot price, verification costs, storage and audit obligations, and the feasibility of a state reserve banking system.
SB0985 would add a new precious-metals regulatory part to Title 45 and amend Titles 9 and 67 to require acceptance of gold and silver coinage for debts and state collections, authorize precious-metals depositories, and direct how such assets are stored and accounted for in state reserves. It would also require rulemaking by the commissioner of financial institutions and create reporting and audit obligations for depositories, while affecting state tax administration, treasury operations, and potentially banking-related policy.
No committee discussion or voting record was provided, so there is no documented public or legislative sentiment to summarize. From the bill’s structure, the measure appears ideologically supportive of gold and silver as money and reserve assets, but the absence of recorded debate means support or opposition cannot be attributed to specific members or committees.
The main likely points of contention are the mandate that gold and silver coinage be accepted at spot price for debts and taxes, the requirement that the receiving entity bear verification costs, and the directive to store and account for precious metals as part of the state’s reserve for revenue fluctuations. Additional concerns may include the practicality and legality of a state reserve banking system, the administrative burden on the commissioner of financial institutions and the comptroller, and whether the bill’s treatment of gold and silver could conflict with existing financial, tax, or constitutional provisions. No specific opposing or supporting stakeholders are identified in the provided record.