{ "jurisdiction_id": "US-IL", "jurisdiction": "United States – Illinois", "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/", "generator": "render_jid v13.3.0", "date_modified": "2026-08-17", "schema_version": "crypto-v2.0.0", "counts": { "modules": 8, "sourced_findings": 24, "source_register": 10 }, "modules": [ { "code": "crypto_licensing", "name": "Crypto Licensing", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/#crypto-licensing-crypto-licensing", "standing_position": "Illinois historically regulated crypto only through its general Transmitters of Money Act (TOMA), under which 2017 IDFPR guidance held that digital currency is not 'money' but that fiat-to-crypto exchange/kiosk activity triggers a TOMA money-transmitter license. This changed materially in August 2025 when Illinois enacted two bespoke crypto statutes: the Digital Assets and Consumer Protection Act (SB 1797), giving IDFPR direct licensing/oversight authority over digital asset businesses and exchanges, and the Digital Asset Kiosk Act (SB 2319), a registration regime for crypto ATM/kiosk operators. Implementing rules, licensee lists, and precise operative dates for the new regime have not been independently confirmed in this pass, so the seed's caution against assuming a bespoke licence is now superseded and flagged for verification.", "findings": [ { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null } ] }, { "code": "token_classification", "name": "Token Classification", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/#token-classification-token-classification", "standing_position": "Illinois has not enacted a state-level token taxonomy; token characterization is governed exclusively at the federal level. 2026 SEC interpretive guidance distinguishes digital commodities (e.g., BTC, ETH), digital securities/tokenized securities, digital tools, digital collectibles, and stablecoins, while the federal GENIUS Act separately provides that compliant payment stablecoins are generally not securities. This module's category enum does not map cleanly onto the SEC's 'digital commodity' concept, so such assets are tagged 'unclassified' pending a closer fit.", "findings": [ { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null } ] }, { "code": "on_chain_activity_regime", "name": "On-Chain Activity Regime", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/#on-chain-activity-regime-on-chain-activity-regime", "standing_position": "Illinois has not enacted state-specific statutes addressing staking, DeFi lending, DEX operation, mining, node operation, validator activity, or tokenization as distinct on-chain categories. DACPA's scope targets custodial digital-asset businesses and exchanges rather than protocol-level activity, and 2017 IDFPR guidance expressly excluded miners from money-transmission licensure. This module is emitted with narrow claims reflecting the absence of a dedicated regime.", "findings": [ { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null } ] }, { "code": "stablecoin_regime", "name": "Stablecoin Regime", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/#stablecoin-regime-stablecoin-regime", "standing_position": "Illinois has not enacted a separate state-level stablecoin issuance regime. Payment stablecoin issuance, reserve, redemption, and disclosure obligations for issuers serving Illinois customers are governed by the federal GENIUS Act (signed July 18, 2025), whose implementing regulations are still being developed by federal agencies.", "findings": [ { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null } ] }, { "code": "consumer_protection", "name": "Consumer Protection", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/#consumer-protection-consumer-protection", "standing_position": "Illinois' 2025 crypto statutes introduce bespoke consumer-protection obligations distinct from generic TOMA money-transmission rules: DACPA requires investment disclosures and customer-service parity with traditional financial services for IDFPR-regulated digital asset businesses, while the Digital Asset Kiosk Act imposes fee caps, transaction limits, and dedicated compliance/consumer-protection officer roles on kiosk operators.", "findings": [ { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null } ] }, { "code": "tax_treatment", "name": "Tax Treatment", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/#tax-treatment-tax-treatment", "standing_position": "Illinois enacted the Digital Asset Tax Act (DATA) on June 16, 2026 as part of the FY2027 budget, imposing a novel 0.2% transaction-based levy on 'digital asset business activity' distinct from income or capital-gains taxation. Federal law separately treats virtual currency as property for income-tax purposes, which Illinois follows via its conformity to federal adjusted gross income. DATA is under active legal challenge (The Digital Chamber's July 21, 2026 lawsuit) and has drawn sharp federal regulatory criticism; its effective date is January 1, 2027.", "findings": [ { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null } ] }, { "code": "cross_border_transfer", "name": "Cross-Border Transfer", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/#cross-border-transfer-cross-border-transfer", "standing_position": "Illinois does not maintain a distinct state-level cross-border/international crypto-transfer regime; outbound and international transfer restrictions derive solely from federal OFAC sanctions and BSA/FinCEN frameworks. Separately, DATA's $100,000 gross-receipts nexus threshold creates an interstate reporting/remittance obligation for out-of-state digital asset businesses serving Illinois residents, which functions similarly to a cross-border reporting trigger even though it is domestic (interstate) rather than international in scope.", "findings": [ { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null }, { "finding": null, "instrument_type": null, "source": null, "source_url": null, "source_tier": null, "retrieved_at": null } ] }, { "code": "aml_cft_regime", "name": "AML/CFT Regime", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-illinois/#aml-cft-regime-aml-cft-regime", "standing_position": "Crypto AML/CFT obligations applicable to Illinois-based or Illinois-serving digital asset businesses (KYC/CDD, travel rule, SAR/STR reporting, sanctions screening, record-keeping, risk assessment) are governed under the fleet's shared Financial Integrity Module (FIM) aml_ctf baseline via the federal Bank Secrecy Act/FinCEN framework. Per module subscription rules, no aml_ctf claims are produced in this crypto baseline. As disambiguation context only: FinCEN's August 2025 notice on convertible-virtual-currency kiosks specifically flagged Illinois/Chicago as a locus of illicit-proceeds laundering via CVC kiosks, which is relevant background for the Illinois Digital Asset Kiosk Act but is not itself a crypto-consumer AML claim.", "findings": [] } ] }