Ohio Bitcoin Reserve Act (SB 57)

The Ohio Bitcoin Reserve Act is the short title for Ohio Senate Bill 57, a 2025 proposal in the 136th General Assembly. As of June 9, 2026, the measure remains a pending bill in the Ohio Senate after referral to the Senate Financial Institutions, Insurance and Technology Committee. It has not been enacted and has no operative effective date.

What Ohio SB 57 would do

SB 57 would amend sections 9.16, 113.40, and 2981.12 of the Ohio Revised Code and enact new sections 135.146 and 5703.83. Its core design is to give the Treasurer of State a statutory route to acquire and hold bitcoin for a state reserve, while also adding cryptocurrency to public-payment systems and forfeited-property rules.

The proposed reserve fund is narrower than a general digital-asset investment program. The bill defines “bitcoin” as a decentralized digital asset created by a peer-to-peer network with no central authority or banks. It would create an Ohio bitcoin reserve fund in the state treasury, administered by the Treasurer of State, and would permit the Treasurer to use interim state money and amounts deposited into the fund to acquire bitcoin as an investment.

Key provisions of the Ohio Bitcoin Reserve Act

• State bitcoin investment authority: The Treasurer of State could acquire bitcoin using interim state money and reserve-fund deposits.
• Minimum holding period: Bitcoin acquired as an investment would have to remain in state custody for at least five years before it could be transferred, sold, appropriated, or converted to another cryptocurrency.
• Cryptocurrency payments: Governmental entities would have to accept cryptocurrency approved by the Tax Commissioner for taxes, fees, fines, assessments, and other public payments. State entities that receive cryptocurrency for state expenses would convert it to bitcoin and transfer it to the reserve fund.
• Custody controls: State bitcoin investments would have to be held through a secure custody solution by the Treasurer or a qualified custodian. The secure-custody definition includes private-key restrictions, encrypted access, geographically diversified hardware, multi-party governance, access controls, activity logs, disaster recovery, code audits, and penetration testing.
• Donations and forfeiture transfers: The bill would allow bitcoin contributions from Ohio residents, public bodies, and state higher-education institutions. It would also allow bitcoin held as unclaimed or forfeited property to be transferred to the reserve fund or handled under existing property-disposition rules.

Payments, tax administration, and reporting

The proposal would add a new role for the Ohio Tax Commissioner. By June 30 of each year, the commissioner would approve and publish on the Department of Taxation website a list of cryptocurrencies acceptable for public payments. That mechanism would make payment acceptance dependent on a published administrative list rather than a static list in the statute.

SB 57 also includes reporting obligations for the Treasurer of State. A biennial report, due by December 31 of each even-numbered year, would disclose the amount of bitcoin held as an investment, the equivalent U.S. dollar value, changes since the prior report, related transactions or expenditures, and security threats experienced in administering the reserve provisions.

Status and CryptoSlate editorial context

As introduced, SB 57 is a bill rather than enacted Ohio law. The current legislative record shows introduction on January 28, 2025, referral to the Senate Financial Institutions, Insurance and Technology Committee on January 29, 2025, and no bill amendments currently on file in the referenced tracking record. A first sponsor hearing was listed for February 11, 2025.

For CryptoSlate readers, the bill is relevant to government crypto holdings, public-sector custody, cryptocurrency payments, and digital-asset forfeiture administration. It should not be described as authorizing an active Ohio bitcoin reserve unless enacted. Editors should also verify any later committee activity before publication, because pending state bills can change materially through substitute bills or amendments.