Kansas interim committee hears cryptocurrency primer and federal, state policy updates
Loading...
Summary
A National Cryptocurrency Association educator gave Kansas lawmakers a basic overview of crypto and users’ experiences; Legislative Research and outside experts reviewed recent federal legislation and state-level policy options, and speakers urged clearer rules and consumer education.
Ally Tager, vice president of communications for the National Cryptocurrency Association, told members of a Kansas special interim committee that cryptocurrency is a technical tool being used today for payments, investment and tokenizing assets and that many Americans are already using it.
Tager said the NCA’s research shows roughly one in five U.S. adults currently use crypto and that many holders — ranging from ranchers to small-business owners — find the technology useful for instant cross-border payments, lower fees and new ways to hold and transfer value. “Our goal is that you walk away from today’s session with more of what exactly crypto is, but more importantly, how your constituents can benefit from the technology in their personal and professional lives so that when it does come time to shape policy, legislation, and regulation, you are as informed as possible,” she told the committee.
The committee then received a federal-policy briefing from Mike Ditch of the Kansas Legislative Research Department. Ditch summarized 2025 federal actions he said are the most relevant to state and local policymakers: the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (commonly called the Genius Act), a House-passed Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (the “Clarity Act” in committee at the U.S. Senate), and two 2025 executive orders.
Ditch described the Genius Act’s central elements: a 1-to-1 reserve requirement for payment stablecoins, a list of permissible reserve assets, enhanced disclosure and audit requirements for issuers, Bank Secrecy Act/AML coverage, and options for a state regulatory path for smaller nonbank issuers that remain under certain thresholds. “The act creates a state regulatory option for nonbank stablecoin issuers with fewer than $10,000,000,000 in outstanding stablecoins, provided the regulatory regime is substantially similar to the federal regime,” he said.
On the Clarity Act, Ditch summarized provisions that would clarify which federal regulator — the SEC or the CFTC — has primary jurisdiction over various digital-asset activities and that would require centralized trading platforms and brokers to register with the CFTC while allowing SEC-registered intermediaries to operate in certain digital commodity markets.
Outside speakers, including representatives from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), urged the committee to consider state-level steps to encourage industry growth while protecting consumers and privacy. Alan Jernigan and Jake Marabito of ALEC outlined model policies that they said can make Kansas more predictable for digital-asset businesses: statutory definitions, regulatory sandboxes, mutual recognition for money-transmitter licenses, and limits on state acceptance or promotion of a central bank digital currency (CBDC). “There’s an opportunity for additional states like Kansas to further protect their citizens’ financial privacy,” Jernigan said.
Committee members asked for more detail on several topics: how blockchains differ from tokens and tokenization; how reserve rules in the Genius Act seek to reduce run risk; tax treatment of crypto under current IRS guidance (property treatment for now); and practical consumer-protection needs such as fraud prevention and guidance on securing wallet recovery phrases. Tager and panelists highlighted NCA consumer resources and said industry groups have begun coordinating with federal consumer-protection entities to improve education.
Why it matters: committee members heard that federal rules and state choices now interact — federal legislation can set national guardrails while states can create pathways, consumer protections and market clarity. Committee members repeatedly flagged two priorities: improving consumer education and deciding whether Kansas should adopt targeted state policies (definitions, limited preemption, and pilot regulatory sandboxes) to attract responsible investment.
What’s next: committee members asked Legislative Research to provide follow-up materials, including the text of the Genius Act’s reserve rules, and to map how state-level options (license reciprocity, sandbox authority, and certain tax treatments) would interact with existing Kansas law.
Ending: speakers emphasized—without proposing specific legislative text—that clearer, technology-neutral definitions, consumer education and narrow, targeted reforms are the immediate levers the committee could study further. The committee spent the rest of the day shifting to housing topics that many members said are closely connected to local economic development and workforce needs.
