{ "jurisdiction_id": "US-MI", "jurisdiction": "United States – Michigan", "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-michigan/", "generator": "render_jid v13.3.0", "date_modified": "2026-08-17", "schema_version": "crypto-v2.0.0", "counts": { "modules": 7, "sourced_findings": 17, "source_register": 13 }, "modules": [ { "code": "crypto_licensing", "name": "Crypto Licensing", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-michigan/#crypto-licensing-crypto-licensing", "standing_position": "Michigan has no bespoke crypto-asset licensing statute. Virtual-currency exchange, custody and transmission businesses fall under Michigan's general money-transmitter licensing regime, administered through the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS) by the state's banking/financial-institutions regulator, mirroring the federal FinCEN money-transmitter definition. Crypto-adjacent payment firms (e.g., X Payments) have obtained Michigan money transmitter licenses on this basis. A pending bill (HB 4511) would bar the state from imposing bans or license requirements on individuals merely holding crypto and would restrict state support for a U.S. CBDC, but it has not been enacted.", "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": "token_classification", "name": "Token Classification", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-michigan/#token-classification-token-classification", "standing_position": "Michigan has not enacted a state-specific token-classification statute. Per the disambiguation applicable to this JID, characterization of a digital asset as a security, commodity, or other instrument is governed by federal SEC/CFTC jurisdiction rather than by a Michigan-specific rule; Michigan's role is limited to money-transmission/custody licensing, not securities characterization.", "findings": [ { "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-michigan/#on-chain-activity-regime-on-chain-activity-regime", "standing_position": "Michigan has no enacted state statute specifically regulating staking, DeFi lending, DEX operation, node/validator operation, or tokenization. A pending bill package (HB 4512/HB 4513) would create a bitcoin-mining program using abandoned oil and gas well sites, with a companion income-tax provision, but neither has been enacted as of this run.", "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-michigan/#stablecoin-regime-stablecoin-regime", "standing_position": "Michigan has no independent state stablecoin statute. Stablecoin issuance in the U.S. is now governed by the federal GENIUS Act (signed into law July 18, 2025), which establishes issuance, reserve, redemption, and disclosure requirements and permits state-qualified issuers to operate under a state regime only if certified by federal regulators as substantially similar to the federal framework; final implementing regulations remain pending, with regulators having missed the one-year rulemaking deadline. Until GENIUS's implementing rules take effect, stablecoin issuers operating in Michigan continue to rely on the state's general money-transmitter licensing 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 }, { "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-michigan/#consumer-protection-consumer-protection", "standing_position": "Michigan has not enacted a crypto-kiosk/ATM-specific consumer protection statute comparable to Illinois's Digital Asset Kiosk Act or Minnesota's kiosk ban. Consumer protection currently rests on (a) the Michigan Attorney General's Consumer Protection Division, which has issued a cryptocurrency 'pig butchering' scam alert referenced in federal guidance, and (b) federal FinCEN advisories/notices on CVC kiosk fraud that inform financial-institution reporting obligations nationwide, including in Michigan. The Michigan Attorney General has also acted as a co-plaintiff in federal (CFTC) enforcement matters touching digital-asset-adjacent investment fraud.", "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": "tax_treatment", "name": "Tax Treatment", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-michigan/#tax-treatment-tax-treatment", "standing_position": "Michigan personal and corporate income tax generally conforms to the federal tax base. At the federal level, virtual currency is treated as property (not currency) for federal tax purposes per longstanding IRS guidance (Notice 2014-21), meaning capital gains/ordinary income characterization flows through to Michigan taxable income via federal AGI conformity. A pending Michigan bill (HB 4513) would amend the state's 1967 income tax act to address income from bitcoin mining at abandoned well sites, but it has not been enacted.", "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": "cross_border_transfer", "name": "Cross-Border Transfer", "confidence": null, "moved_this_cycle": false, "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/united-states-michigan/#cross-border-transfer-cross-border-transfer", "standing_position": "Michigan has no independent state statute governing cross-border crypto transfers. Cross-border movement of virtual currency by Michigan-based money transmitters is governed by federal frameworks: FinCEN's Bank Secrecy Act travel-rule and sanctions-screening obligations (applicable to money transmitters generally, a category into which Michigan-licensed virtual-currency businesses fall), and, for stablecoin issuers specifically, GENIUS Act sanctions-compliance and lawful-order provisions currently being implemented via a joint FinCEN/OFAC proposed rule.", "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 } ] } ] }