Crypto Law Profile
Nevada law bars counties and incorporated cities from imposing taxes, fees, licenses, permits or other requirements on blockchain use. SB 398 also treated blockchain as an electronic record under the state’s UETA.
The Nevada Blockchain Technology Tax Prohibition refers to Nevada Senate Bill 398, a 2017 law that added blockchain-specific provisions to Nevada’s Uniform Electronic Transactions Act and restricted local taxation or licensing of blockchain use. The measure was approved by the Governor on June 5, 2017, as Chapter 391, and took effect the same day. It is now reflected primarily in NRS 244.3535, NRS 268.0979, NRS 719.045 and NRS 719.090.
The law is technology-focused rather than asset-specific. It does not create a comprehensive digital asset licensing regime, authorize a particular token, or exempt blockchain businesses from generally applicable state or federal law. Its core function is to prevent Nevada counties and incorporated cities from creating blockchain-specific local taxes, fees, permits, licenses or other use requirements.
NRS 244.3535 applies to county boards of commissioners, while NRS 268.0979 applies to incorporated cities. Together, the provisions state that those local government bodies may not impose a tax or fee on a person or entity’s use of a blockchain, require a certificate, license or permit to use a blockchain, or impose another requirement relating to blockchain use.
SB 398 also amended Nevada’s electronic transactions law to recognize blockchain as part of the state’s electronic-record framework. Current NRS 719.090 defines an electronic record as a record created, generated, sent, communicated, received or stored by electronic means and states that the term includes a blockchain. This links blockchain records to Nevada’s broader treatment of electronic records, signatures and contracts under Chapter 719.
Current NRS 719.045 defines blockchain by reference to an ordered electronic record of transactions or other data, decentralized processing, redundant maintenance and cryptographic validation. In 2019, SB 162 amended the definition to state that blockchain includes, without limitation, a public blockchain. Those SB 162 definitional amendments became effective on October 1, 2019.
The prohibition is state-level preemption aimed at local governments within Nevada. It does not prevent a county or city from using blockchain in the performance of its own powers or duties, provided that use is not inconsistent with Chapter 719. It also does not override taxes, licensing rules, securities laws, money-transmission laws or other requirements that apply for reasons other than the mere use of blockchain technology.
For crypto businesses and other technology users, the practical legal-reference point is narrow: Nevada local governments may not single out blockchain use itself for a local tax, fee, license, permit or comparable requirement. Editors should avoid describing the law as a general tax exemption for cryptocurrencies or digital asset businesses; SB 398 addresses blockchain use and local restrictions, not every transaction, business model or asset classification.
The affected population is broadly framed as any person or entity using a blockchain, rather than a discrete set of regulated intermediaries. That breadth makes the statute relevant to blockchain infrastructure developers, businesses maintaining records on distributed ledgers, and public-blockchain users, while leaving separate legal questions to other Nevada and federal regimes.
This profile should be treated as a legal-reference summary, not legal, tax or compliance advice. The official Nevada Revised Statutes and bill history should be checked for amendments before publication or reuse in a compliance-sensitive context.
County boards may not impose taxes or fees, require certificates, licenses or permits, or impose other requirements on blockchain use.
Incorporated cities may not impose taxes, fees, licenses, permits or other requirements on blockchain use by any person or entity.
Nevada’s electronic-record definition includes blockchain, linking blockchain records to Chapter 719’s UETA framework.
Current NRS 719.045 defines blockchain to include, without limitation, a public blockchain after SB 162.
SB 398 was read first time and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The Senate passed SB 398, as amended, before sending it to the Assembly.
The Assembly passed SB 398, as amended, with title approved.
Governor approved SB 398 as Chapter 391; the bill became effective the same day.
Core SB 162 amendments adding public blockchain to the blockchain definition became effective.
Blockchain users, Public blockchain users, Technology businesses
As of 2026-06-03, this profile centers on SB 398 and codified Nevada law. It also notes SB 162’s 2019 public-blockchain amendments to NRS 719.045.
