WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1095

An Act amending the act of June 13, 1967 (P.L.31, No.21), known as the Human Services Code, in Pennsylvania Rural Health Redesign Center Authority, further providing for definitions, for Pennsylvania Rural Health Redesign Center Authority, for powers and duties, for roles of participating payers, for roles of participant rural hospitals and for data collection and retention; and making an editorial change.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Michele Brooks and 1 co-sponsor

Arizona SB 1095 bans federally recognized CBDC from legal tender or as payment in contracts, while allowing USD-backed distributed ledger transfers and barring CBDC settlement.

First consideration
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1095

Summary — SB 1095 (2025) — “REVENUE‑TECH” (central bank digital currency; ban)

Note: The provided document mixes materials from more than one jurisdiction (Arizona bill text and unrelated Illinois bill text and procedural entries). This summary focuses on the Arizona bill language in the packet, which is titled and drafted as an Arizona measure that would ban federally recognized central bank digital currency (CBDC) as legal tender.

Purpose / Intent

SB 1095 adds a state-level legal framework that (1) defines “legal tender” for Arizona law and (2) expressly prohibits federally recognized central bank digital currency (CBDC) from being treated or used as legal tender or as a medium/subject of payment in contracts, securities, or similar instruments in the state. The bill also updates several existing Arizona statutes (escrow, trust companies, and others) to conform to that definition and to address permitted forms of digital transfers.

Key provisions

  • New Chapter (Title 1, Chapter 9 — Legal Tender)
    • 1-901: Defines “legal tender” as any medium of exchange authorized by the U.S. Constitution or Congress for payment of debts, except federally recognized central bank digital currency. “Specie” is defined as coins with precious metal content.
    • 1-902: Explicit prohibition — federally recognized CBDC may not be used as legal tender or be the subject/medium of payment of any contract, security, or similar instrument in Arizona. The provision is stated to apply to all contracts and securities, “notwithstanding Title 47,” explicitly covering commercial transactions.
  • Escrow statute amendments (A.R.S. § 6-843)
    • Lists acceptable deposit/disbursement forms (wire transfers, checks, ACH, cashier’s checks, etc.).
    • Adds a new permitted method: “distributed ledger technology transfers” among federally insured depository institutions, provided transfers are settled by an established national clearing house network and are fully settled, irrevocably credited, and transferred in U.S. dollars.
    • Requires such distributed ledger transfers to maintain price stability by being backed to U.S. dollars redeemable one‑to‑one.
    • Explicitly states transfers under this section “may not be settled or backed by federally recognized central bank digital currency.”
    • $500 per transaction (or cash-available funds) exception remains for small disbursements.
  • Trust company statute amendments (A.R.S. § 6-851)
    • Aligns the trust company definition of “legal tender” to the new chapter’s definition (i.e., excluding federally recognized CBDC).
  • Other statutes listed as amended (9-1443, 11-1943, 43-1021, 43-1022, 43-1121, 43-1122, 47-1201)
    • The bill sheet notes amendments to these sections, but the full text in the packet is truncated. Based on context, these likely update cross-references and definitions to reflect the new legal tender definition and CBDC prohibition.

Who/what is affected

  • State of Arizona: state contracts and obligations governed by Arizona law cannot use federally recognized CBDC as payment or legal tender.
  • Private parties and commercial transactions in Arizona: contracts, securities, escrow arrangements and other instruments cannot be denominated in or paid with federally recognized CBDC.
  • Escrow agents and depository institutions: permitted to use certain distributed ledger transfers, but those transfers must be USD‑backed and may not be settled by a CBDC; settlement must use established national clearing networks.
  • Trust companies and fiduciaries: their statutory definitions of liquid capital/legal tender are adjusted to exclude federally recognized CBDC.
  • Providers or proponents of a federal CBDC: adoption of a federally recognized CBDC could face limits on practical use within Arizona’s private and public transactional space.

Procedural / timeline (as provided)

  • Introduced (Arizona version): February 4, 2025.
  • Document shows a “Senate Engrossed” version with the same CBDC ban language.
  • Status line in packet: Rule 3-9(a) / Re‑referred to Assignments.
  • The packet also contains a longer list of legislative actions (dates through May 2025) that appear to mix entries from other jurisdictions and bills; some entries (e.g., “Vetoed by Governor”) may not apply to the Arizona measure described above. Verify current committee status and final disposition with the Arizona Legislature’s official bill tracking site.

Notes / potential impacts

  • The bill is a state-law prohibition that could complicate interoperability if a federal CBDC is created, because it would bar use of a federally recognized CBDC in contracts and many financial instruments within Arizona.
  • The escrow provisions create a path for certain tokenized or ledger-based transfers, but strictly require USD backing (redeemable 1:1) and settlement via national clearing networks — effectively limiting acceptance of tokenized assets that are not dollar‑pegged or that rely on CBDC settlement.
  • Because the packet contains truncated and mixed content, stakeholders should consult the official bill text and legislative history from the Arizona Senate/House to confirm scope and current status.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.