States of Tennessee, Utah, South Carolina, and South Dakota have all introduced bills to discourage using central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) interchangeably with physical currency.
On January 12, Tennessee State Senator Frank Niceley introduced a bill to the Senate. Money is a recognized and permitted medium of commerce under the Tennessee Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). However, the proposed legislation would amend that definition to include the phrase “does not include any central bank digital currency.”
A comprehensive collection of standardized laws, the UCC regulates all commercial transactions in the United States. According to a standardized framework, it facilitates business dealings and transactions across state lines.
On January 4, Representative Tyler Clancy introduced House Bill 164 in the Utah House of Representatives. According to the proposed legislation, central bank digital currency is a digital form directly accessible or verified by government entities such as the U.S. Federal Reserve, foreign governments, central banks, or reserve systems.
In effect, the proposed Utah CBDC law would exclude CBDC from the state’s definition of money under the Utah Specie Legal Tender Act and the state’s UCC by stipulating that “a central bank digital currency is not specie legal tender and is not legal tender in the state.”
On November 30, 2023, South Carolina State Senator Shane Martin introduced Senate Bill 861. Like that of Tennessee, the UCC of South Carolina designates money as a valid medium of exchange. The proposed legislation S861, on the other hand, would amend that definition to read “does not include any central bank digital currency.”
On January 9, the Department of Labor and Regulation of South Dakota requested that the chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce and Energy present Senate Bill 58. The legislation amends the state’s UCC to state that “money does not include any central bank digital currency.”
Florida has previously enacted legislation of a similar nature. Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida endorsed legislation that limits the state’s utilization of CBDCs. Additionally, it prohibited using CBDCs issued by foreign governments and urged other states to implement comparable prohibitions through their commercial codes.