As a seasoned crypto investor with a knack for spotting trends and a keen interest in monetary policy, I find the ongoing anti-CBDC push in Missouri intriguing, if not a bit puzzling. Having navigated through the volatile waters of Bitcoin’s early days and witnessed the rise of stablecoins like Tether (USDT), I can’t help but feel a sense of déjà vu.
Efforts persist in the U.S. state of Missouri to prevent the possible implementation of digital currencies issued by central banks (CBDCs). This year, several bills have been introduced in Missouri with the aim of delaying or blocking the introduction of this yet-to-be-launched digital currency within the United States.
Bullion yes, CBDC no
On December 1st, Republican Senator Rick Brattin submitted Senate Bill (SB) 194 for consideration. This bill proposes amendments to existing state laws, aiming to restrict public bodies from adopting Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) or participating in their testing phases. Furthermore, the definition of money under the state’s Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) would be revised to exclude CBDCs.
The proposed legislation not only includes regulations for Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), but it additionally mandates that at least 1% of the state’s funds be held in gold and silver. It furthermore exempts transactions involving gold and silver, such as sales or exchanges, from the state capital gains tax. Lastly, it designates gold and silver as legal tender within the state.
“The act declares that gold and silver shall be accepted as legal tender at their spot price plus market premium […] in the state of Missouri. Costs incurred in the course of verification of the weight and purity of any gold or silver […] shall be borne by the receiving entity.”
Massive legislative anti-CBDC push
As an analyst, I’ve noticed that the proposals regarding Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) in this bill share striking resemblances or even identical elements with the bills presented in Missouri earlier this year.
1352 SB (Senate Bill) proposes several modifications to the state’s Uniform Commercial Code, including the restriction on Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC). Currently, it is under consideration in committee. Similarly, House Bill 2780 also includes a ban on CBDC and impacts various commercial transactions. This bill has passed a vote in the House and is now being sent to the state Senate for further review.
The proposed bills SB 826, SB 736, and their corresponding House bill focused on Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) and precious metals like gold and silver, but they all failed to be passed. Previously, SB 866, introduced by Brattin, shared similar provisions with slight differences in wording, but it also did not pass, having been put to rest in committee.
There’s a growing trend of anti-Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) bills being approved in various U.S. states. In the past couple of months, both Louisiana and North Carolina have enacted such legislation.
On a national scale, efforts are underway to combat Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). In fact, the US House of Representatives approved the CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act on May 23.
Read More
- CTXC PREDICTION. CTXC cryptocurrency
- DGB PREDICTION. DGB cryptocurrency
- WRX/USD
- TRU PREDICTION. TRU cryptocurrency
- ZIG PREDICTION. ZIG cryptocurrency
- GFI PREDICTION. GFI cryptocurrency
- Bakkt shares surge 162% after report suggests Trump Media is buying it
- RIF PREDICTION. RIF cryptocurrency
- TNSR PREDICTION. TNSR cryptocurrency
- I’m a Celebrity voting figures revealed after Danny Jones crowned winner
2024-12-04 20:39