Cryptoassets Regulatory Intelligence cryptoassets.gi
US-AZ · run crypto-2026-08-05 v13.3.0
content: ai_generated 13 sources retrieved model claude-sonnet-5 ·

United States – Arizona

US-AZ schema crypto-v2.0.0 trajectory: not recordedregulatedoverlaps: FIM, WPM

Last updated · 8 categories · 20 sourced findings · 13 sources in the cumulative register

8Categoriesbaseline.
20Findings.claims[]
0Tier-1 sourcesrun_metadata.t1_source_count
Confidence mix (sums to 8 rendered categories; click to filter)
No categories moved this cycle.

Jurisdiction brief

No content recorded at this JID path.

8 of 8 categories
Signal
Density

Selections OR within a group, AND across groups. Press / to search.

#

Arizona has no bespoke crypto-asset licensing statute. Virtual-currency exchange, transmission, and custody businesses fall under Arizona's general money-transmitter licensing law (A.R.S. Title 6, Chapter 12), administered through the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS), with the Arizona Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions as the state supervisor. Token characterization for securities purposes is governed by federal SEC/CFTC jurisdiction, not a distinct Arizona crypto license. Whether Arizona's MTL statute contains crypto-specific carve-outs beyond general MSB-type exemptions has not been independently verified in this pass.

Absence reason not determinableNo sub-brief exists and the JID records no gap or review marker explaining why. The renderer will not invent a reason.

No periodic updates recorded against this sub-brief.

Sources and findings (3)
  1. T?source not recordedM5bindingin force
  2. T?source not recordedM3bindingin force
  3. T?source not recordedM3non-binding

#

Arizona has no independent state-law taxonomy for crypto tokens. Classification for securities, commodity, and stablecoin purposes in Arizona is governed by federal law: the SEC/CFTC's March 2026 joint interpretive 'token taxonomy' release (digital commodities, digital collectibles, digital tools, stablecoins, digital securities) and the GENIUS Act for payment stablecoins. This federal framework applies uniformly in Arizona per the disambiguation guidance for this JID.

Absence reason not determinableNo sub-brief exists and the JID records no gap or review marker explaining why. The renderer will not invent a reason.

No periodic updates recorded against this sub-brief.

Sources and findings (4)
  1. T?source not recordedM5bindingin force
  2. T?source not recordedM4bindingin force
  3. T?source not recordedM4bindingin force
  4. T?source not recordedM3bindingin force

#

Arizona has no dedicated licensing regime for staking, mining, node operation, or validator activity. A 2017-2018 Arizona legislative package sought to protect blockchain infrastructure activity from local interference (node/mining protection, blockchain data-storage recognition), though final enactment of the specific node-protection bill could not be fully confirmed in this pass. Separately, the 2026 federal SEC/CFTC interpretive taxonomy excludes protocol staking and mining from 'digital security' scope, reducing federal securities-law friction for these activities in Arizona.

Absence reason not determinableNo sub-brief exists and the JID records no gap or review marker explaining why. The renderer will not invent a reason.

No periodic updates recorded against this sub-brief.

Sources and findings (3)
  1. T?source not recordedM3non-binding
  2. T?source not recordedM3bindingin force
  3. T?source not recordedM3bindingin force

#

Arizona has no state-specific stablecoin issuance regime. Issuance, reserve, and redemption requirements for payment stablecoins are governed federally under the GENIUS Act, with OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, and NCUA rules controlling federally chartered issuers, and Treasury's 'substantially similar' test governing state-qualified issuer regimes. No Arizona state-qualified payment stablecoin issuer regime has been identified in this pass.

Absence reason not determinableNo sub-brief exists and the JID records no gap or review marker explaining why. The renderer will not invent a reason.

No periodic updates recorded against this sub-brief.

Sources and findings (3)
  1. T?source not recordedM4bindingin force
  2. T?source not recordedM4bindingin force
  3. T?source not recordedM2non-binding

#

Arizona lacks a bespoke crypto consumer-protection statute, but the Arizona Attorney General's office has taken direct action against crypto-ATM fraud, including posting on-site warning signage at kiosk locations. Federal FinCEN guidance separately flags convertible virtual currency (CVC) kiosks as a high fraud-risk channel nationally, including in Arizona. General Arizona consumer-fraud law may apply by default to crypto marketing and complaint-handling, but specific statutory citations were not independently sourced in this pass.

Absence reason not determinableNo sub-brief exists and the JID records no gap or review marker explaining why. The renderer will not invent a reason.

No periodic updates recorded against this sub-brief.

Sources and findings (2)
  1. T?source not recordedM4non-binding
  2. T?source not recordedM2non-binding

#

Arizona's 2018 legislative effort (SB 1091) to allow direct cryptocurrency payment of state tax liabilities was stripped of all crypto-specific language before final enactment; no operative Arizona statute currently permits direct crypto tax payment. HB 2749 (2025) integrates unclaimed crypto assets into Arizona's unclaimed-property framework and was characterized by its sponsor as creating 'tax free' treatment for the resulting Bitcoin and Digital Assets Reserve, though the precise statutory tax mechanics were not independently verified against bill text in this pass. General Arizona income-tax conformity to federal property characterization of crypto gains was not independently confirmed.

Absence reason not determinableNo sub-brief exists and the JID records no gap or review marker explaining why. The renderer will not invent a reason.

No periodic updates recorded against this sub-brief.

Sources and findings (3)
  1. T?source not recordedM3bindingin force
  2. T?source not recordedM3bindingin force
  3. T?source not recordedM3non-binding

#

Arizona imposes no state-specific cross-border crypto-transfer restrictions. Sanctions-nexus and cross-border reporting obligations applicable to Arizona-licensed money transmitters and any Arizona-domiciled stablecoin-adjacent entities derive entirely from federal OFAC sanctions, BSA/FinCEN cross-border reporting rules, and GENIUS Act sanctions-compliance provisions, which apply uniformly regardless of state licensing status.

Absence reason not determinableNo sub-brief exists and the JID records no gap or review marker explaining why. The renderer will not invent a reason.

No periodic updates recorded against this sub-brief.

Sources and findings (2)
  1. T?source not recordedM4bindingin force
  2. T?source not recordedM2bindingin force

#

This module is out of scope for the crypto consumer baseline: crypto subscribes to the FIM aml_ctf module for AML/CFT coverage, and no aml_cft_regime claims are produced here by design. Any AML-adjacent material encountered during research (e.g., FinCEN CVC-kiosk guidance, GENIUS Act AML/CFT NPRM references to Arizona's money-transmitter definition) was captured as disambiguation context within other modules (crypto_licensing, cross_border_transfer, consumer_protection) rather than as aml_cft_regime claims.

Absence reason not determinableNo sub-brief exists and the JID records no gap or review marker explaining why. The renderer will not invent a reason.

No periodic updates recorded against this sub-brief.

No categories match.

Filters combine as OR inside a group and AND across groups.

Editorial metadata

Provenance only. Nothing below gates publication or affects the render.

Editorial metadata for United States – Arizona
FieldValue
trust.lawyer_review.statusnever_reviewed
trust.lawyer_review.reviewernot recorded
trust.content_sourceai_generated

Provenance and declared absence

Disclosure model: module cards load OPEN; standing positions render in full; sub-briefs and jurisdiction briefs load as a clamped teaser with an explicit “read full” control carrying the true word count; earlier updates stay collapsed behind a counted summary. No text is hidden without disclosing how much of it there is.

Sentinel-fed modules receive no special rendering treatment. sentinel_feed is an attribution chip only: it does not suppress content, does not generate an absence reason code, and does not exclude the module from any count, filter, search index or export on this page.

Family taxonomy is renderer-level presentation config, not a JID field. Colour is always duplicated in text and is never the sole carrier of meaning.

Suppressed by doctrine: derived risk score; per-module RAG traffic light; derived_scores = {}.

Band honesty: uncertainty bands are computed against a frozen build clock of 2026-08-17. A year-precision row is never promoted into a tighter band.

Orphan deltas: 0 cycle_delta row(s) target non-module objects and are listed in the rail rather than attached to a card.

Envelope: baseline resolved at jurisdiction_json.baseline; 8 module(s), 20 finding(s), 13 source(s) in the cumulative register.