California’s Assembly has taken major steps toward regulating cryptocurrency with the introduction of AB-1052, initially known as the Money Transmission Act.
The bill – led by California Democrat Avelino Valencia, who chairs the Banking and Finance Committee – focuses on protecting cryptocurrency users, particularly those seeking to maintain control over their digital assets.
According to an update by the prominent non-profit advocacy organization Satoshi Action Fund, key provisions of AB-1052 affirm the right to self-custody of Bitcoin and other digital assets, safeguarding individuals’ ability to hold and manage their digital property without governmental interference. Meanwhile, the bill prohibits public agencies from imposing taxes or restrictions based solely on the use of these assets in transactions.
The bill also includes measures to ensure that unclaimed digital property is handled securely by licensed custodians rather than being left in limbo. A notable addition to the bill extends California’s Political Reform Act of 1974 to prevent public officials from engaging in transactions or promoting digital assets. This aims to avoid conflicts of interest and maintain the integrity of public office.
The amendments were made on March 28th, after the initial February introduction. The bill is currently in the “desk process” and awaiting its first reading in the Assembly.
If enacted, AB-1052’s legal framework will protect the self-custody rights of both investors and users in California, which has an estimated population of 40 million residents.
Several US states are advancing legislation aimed at incorporating Bitcoin into state reserves. Data suggest that 95 Bitcoin-related bills have been proposed across 35 states, with 36 of those bills focused on Bitcoin reserves still active.
Arizona, Oklahoma, and Texas are among the states with ongoing efforts, as tracked by Bitcoin Law’s dashboard on the progress of Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (SBR) bills.
Arizona’s SBR bills are progressing, with the first committee stage completed and the bills now in Chamber 2. Oklahoma and Texas, on the other hand, are still in the early stages of the legislative process.