Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Digital Assets topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commerce panel trims crypto bill language, adds court protections and routes trust provision to study
Summary
Lawmakers narrowed a wide-ranging digital assets bill, cutting references to stablecoins and staking, reducing an investment cap from 10% to 5%, and agreeing to send a proposal on blockchain‑based trusts to a study commission. The panel also debated private‑key court access and a blockchain dispute docket.
The House Commerce and Consumer Affairs subcommittee moved a multi‑part digital assets bill toward amendment after a detailed line‑by‑line review. Sponsors said the bill’s stablecoin and staking language was removed and the proposed cap on digital asset investment by the treasurer was reduced from 10% to 5%.
Treasury oversight and the state treasurer’s discretion were central themes. A sponsor said the bill is “enabling” rather than mandatory for the treasurer: the measure would give the treasurer a toolbox to consider qualified digital assets but does not require immediate purchases. Lawmakers asked whether the General Fund would be exposed; sponsors indicated the treasurer’s board and customary governance would constrain any use of public funds.
Members revised statutory language addressing evidence and law enforcement access to private keys. Several legislators wanted the bill’s private‑key disclosure standard aligned with existing search/seizure statutes so courts could compel disclosure under established procedures. Witness testimony from Josh Hipps, an attorney with the New Hampshire Banking Department, said the state has no detailed statutory regime for custody of crypto assets and that FDIC policy currently limits banks’ ability to custody such assets. Ian Hewitt, a volunteer board member of the New Hampshire Blockchain Council, told the panel that private keys differ qualitatively from bank account credentials: “If someone gets my private keys, I’m done,” he said, arguing for heightened judicial safeguards.
The subcommittee agreed to remove a proposal recognizing blockchain‑based trusts from this omnibus bill and to send that topic to the planned study commission for more detailed work. The panel also endorsed creating a blockchain dispute docket inside the court system to concentrate technical expertise for complex cases; that docket would take effect Jan. 1, 2026, while most bill provisions would take effect 60 days after passage.
The committee approved the bill as amended and moved it forward with an "ought to pass" recommendation; recorded committee votes were taken during the session.
