In December, cryptocurrency executives testified before the House Financial Services Committee that they would like clearer guidance because the lack of a federal framework is causing uncertainty and inconsistent oversight at both the federal and state levels. These comments are not unique to cryptocurrency[1] executives, but mirror recent ones from cannabis[2] and data

On November 22, the New Jersey State Senate introduced Senate Bill No. 4163 (NJ S4163), titled “Virtual Currency and Blockchain Regulation Act.” The bill, sponsored by Senators Thomas Kean, Jr. (R) and Robert Singer (R), if enacted, would establish a regulatory framework for New Jersey virtual currency businesses, create provisions governing the use of blockchain

The proliferation of “neobanks” has recently drawn the attention of lawmakers and regulators. “Neobanks” are financial technology companies that offer bank-like services through a digital interface. These companies often advertise themselves as serving low- to moderate-income individuals who are underserved by traditional banks. Neobanks offer a variety of services, like deposit accounts and paycheck advance

On October 4, California passed a bill requiring a money transmitter to display a toll-free telephone number on its website through which a customer may contact the licensee for customer service issues and receive live customer assistance. The telephone number must be operative at least 10 hours per day, Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays.

Between July 20-22, 2021, state securities regulators in New Jersey, Texas, and Alabama took aim at BlockFi — a cryptocurrency-based platform that has raised $14.7 billion from investors — related to the company’s interest-bearing crypto accounts. This regulatory scrutiny, brought by a bipartisan group of state securities regulators, may prove significant given that state and