Crypto Law Profile

Utah Public Funds Digital Asset Investment Regime (HB 230 – Not Enacted)

Utah HB 230 originally proposed allowing state treasurer investment in qualifying digital assets, but that public-funds authority was removed before final enactment.

Utah, U.S. Withdrawn Bill

At a glance

Status Public-funds investment authority was removed before final enactment.
Final HB 230 Final law covers self-custody, blockchain activity, money-transmission exemptions and mining zoning.
Treasury authority No operative Utah authority to invest public funds in digital assets was enacted.
Final effective date Enacted HB 230 took effect May 7, 2025; the removed proposal has no effective date.

Bill details

Bill number
HB 230
Session
2025 General Session
Chamber
House
Legislative stage
Failed

Action

Last action
Gov. Cox signed final HB 230 without the proposed public-funds digital asset investment authority.
Last action date
Mar 25, 2025

Sponsor

Primary sponsor
Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher
Sponsor party
Republican
Co-sponsors
Sen. Kirk A. Cullimore; Reps. Ken Ivory, David Shallenberger, Kay J. Christofferson, Trevor Lee, Troy Shelley, Tyler Clancy, Matt MacPherson, Lisa Shepherd and others.

Source

Source provider
State legislature
Source ID
HB0230 / Chapter 228, 2025 General Session
State legislature
Official bill page

Overview

Utah's Public Funds Digital Asset Investment Regime is best treated as a proposed component of H.B. 230, the Blockchain and Digital Innovation Amendments, rather than an enacted treasury investment law. Early versions of H.B. 230 would have authorized the Utah state treasurer to invest selected public funds in qualifying digital assets. The public-funds investment authority was removed before the bill was enrolled and signed.

The final H.B. 230 still became Utah law in 2025, but it does not create a state digital asset reserve or authorize public-funds investment in crypto assets. Instead, the enacted law focuses on permitted uses of digital assets, self-custody, blockchain protocol activity, money-transmission licensing exemptions for specified activities, and local zoning limits for digital asset mining businesses.

There is an editorial ambiguity because the enrolled bill's general description still refers to state treasurer authority to invest public funds in certain digital assets. The operative enrolled text, however, does not enact the proposed treasurer investment section and does not amend the public-funds investment chapter in the manner earlier drafts contemplated. That distinction should be preserved in any CryptoSlate profile.

Key provisions of the proposed Utah public funds digital asset investment regime

The proposed investment language appeared in earlier H.B. 230 versions as a new Utah Code section for investments of public funds in digital assets by the state treasurer. The proposal would have addressed asset eligibility, covered accounts, investment limits, custody arrangements, and limited staking or lending authority. It was framed as discretionary treasury authority, not as a mandatory purchase program.

  • Covered public funds: proposed text referenced the State Disaster Recovery Restricted Account, General Fund Budget Reserve Account, Income Tax Fund Budget Reserve Account, and Medicaid Growth Reduction and Budget Stabilization Account.
  • Eligible assets: the proposal used a qualifying digital asset concept tied to large-market-cap digital assets and stablecoins.
  • Investment cap: earlier drafts capped allocations by account; the introduced comparison text showed a 10% cap, while a later substitute used a 5% cap.
  • Custody routes: proposed custody options included direct secure custody, a qualified custodian, or an exchange-traded product issued by a registered investment company.

Status and timeline

The operative public-funds investment regime did not survive to enactment. A comparison between H.B. 230 and the third substitute shows the treasurer investment authorization and related staking and lending language as omitted. The enrolled bill's highlighted provisions instead list restrictions on government interference with digital asset acceptance or custody, rights to operate nodes and participate in staking, money-transmission exemptions, and mining zoning limits.

Gov. Spencer Cox signed H.B. 230 on March 25, 2025, and the enrolled bill states that the final act took effect on May 7, 2025. For CryptoSlate taxonomy purposes, the proposed Utah public-funds digital asset investment component should not be marked as Effective. The closest status mapping is Withdrawn, with an editorial note that the final enacted H.B. 230 omitted the investment authority.

Jurisdictional impact

The proposal would have affected Utah state treasury investment policy and potential custody infrastructure for state-held digital assets. Because it was removed, it does not authorize the Utah state treasurer to allocate reserve accounts to digital assets. The enacted H.B. 230 may still be relevant to Utah crypto-law coverage because it created Utah Code Chapter 29, Digital Asset and Blockchain Technology, covering definitions, permitted use of digital assets, access to blockchain protocols, and limited money-transmission exemptions.

Who it affects

The proposed regime would have primarily affected the Utah state treasurer, managers of specified reserve accounts, qualified custodians, and issuers of investment products that could support state digital asset exposure. The enacted law instead directly affects persons using digital assets, operating blockchain nodes, developing blockchain software, participating in staking, and operating digital asset mining businesses in industrial zones. This profile is for legal-reference tracking only and is not legal, tax, investment, or trading advice.

Key provisions

Proposed treasury investment authority

Earlier HB 230 text would have allowed the state treasurer to invest portions of specified reserve accounts in qualifying digital assets.

Government holdings Source

Proposed asset eligibility

The proposal defined qualifying digital assets by large market capitalization and included stablecoins meeting specified backing and approval criteria.

Asset eligibility Source

Proposed custody routes

Proposed custody options included direct secure custody, qualified custodian custody, or a registered-company exchange-traded product.

Custody Source

Investment provisions removed

The third substitute omitted the treasurer investment authorization and related staking and lending language before enrollment.

Legislative status Source

Final enacted digital asset provisions

Final HB 230 enacted Utah Code Chapter 29 on digital asset use, blockchain protocol access and money-transmission exemptions.

Regulatory perimeter May 7, 2025 Source

Timeline

  1. Initial HB 230 text published

    Initial text proposed state treasurer authority to invest public funds in qualifying digital assets.

    Introduced Source
  2. First substitute retained investment plan

    First substitute kept public-funds investment authority and custody standards.

    Proposed Source
  3. Third substitute omitted investment authority

    Comparison text shows treasury investment, staking and lending provisions omitted from HB 230 S3.

    Withdrawn Source
  4. Governor signed final HB 230

    Governor signed final HB 230, which no longer contained the public-funds investment authority.

    Enacted Source
  5. Final HB 230 effective

    Final enacted digital asset and blockchain provisions took effect; removed investment proposal did not.

    Effective Source

Who it affects

Actors

Gov. Spencer Cox, Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher, Sen. Kirk A. Cullimore, Utah Legislature, Utah State Treasurer

Asset classes

Blockchain tokens, Cryptocurrency, Digital assets, Stablecoins

Official sources

Editorial note

The requested title maps to the public-funds investment provisions proposed in Utah H.B. 230. The final enacted H.B. 230, Chapter 228, omitted the treasury investment authority and instead enacted general digital asset and blockchain provisions.