Cryptoassets Regulatory Intelligence cryptoassets.gi
US-CO · run crypto-2026-08-06 v13.3.0
content: ai_generated 11 sources retrieved model claude-sonnet-5 ·

United States – Colorado

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

Last updated · 8 categories · 12 sourced findings · 11 sources in the cumulative register

8Categoriesbaseline.
12Findings.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.

#

Colorado has no bespoke crypto-asset licensing statute. Virtual-currency exchange, custody, and transmission businesses operating in or serving Colorado residents fall under the state's general Money Transmitters Act (C.R.S. Title 11, Article 110), administered by the Colorado Division of Banking and processed through the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS). Federal FinCEN MSB registration attaches in parallel for any entity accepting and transmitting convertible virtual currency. The precise statutory citation and the existence of any crypto-specific carve-outs within the MTL regime were not independently confirmed against the current C.R.S. text in this research pass and should be verified.

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 recordedM4bindingin force
  3. T?source not recordedM3non-binding

#

Colorado has historically explored a state-level securities exemption for consumptive-purpose digital tokens (the proposed Colorado Digital Token Act), but this research pass could not independently confirm current in-force codification, so its present statutory status is flagged for verification. Absent a confirmed bespoke state carve-out, token characterization in Colorado is effectively driven by federal SEC/CFTC frameworks, which as of 2026 distinguish digital commodities, collectibles, and tools (generally not securities) from tokenized instruments issued or structured as investment contracts (which remain securities regardless of on-chain format).

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 recordedM4non-binding
  2. T?source not recordedM3non-binding
  3. T?source not recordedM4bindingin force

#

No Colorado-specific statute or regulation addressing staking, DeFi lending, DEX operation, mining, node/validator operation, or tokenization was identified in this research pass. These activities in Colorado are governed, if at all, by the same general federal frameworks (SEC/CFTC characterization, FinCEN money-transmission analysis) that apply nationally, with no additional state-level overlay found. This is recorded as a jurisdictional gap pending further primary-source research rather than a confirmed absence of any obligation.

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.

#

Colorado has no identified state-specific stablecoin issuance, reserve, or redemption regime. Payment stablecoins circulating in Colorado are governed at the federal level under the GENIUS Act framework, which SEC leadership guidance treats as placing payment stablecoins outside the scope of federal securities law as a distinct asset category.

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 (1)
  1. T?source not recordedM3bindingin force

#

No bespoke crypto consumer-protection statute for Colorado was identified in this research pass. General consumer protections likely apply via the state's general deceptive-trade-practices law and via the surety-bonding, net-worth, and permissible-investment conditions typically attached to money-transmitter licensure, but the specific text and applicability of these provisions to crypto licensees was not verified against primary sources 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 recordedM3non-binding
  2. T?source not recordedM2non-binding

#

Colorado is one of a small number of U.S. states that formally accepts cryptocurrency for state payments. Since September 2022, the Colorado Department of Revenue has accepted crypto payments (via a third-party processor, PayPal) for personal income tax, business income tax, severance tax, and withholding tax, with the state converting proceeds to USD rather than holding crypto directly. Substantive income/capital-gains tax treatment of crypto held by Colorado taxpayers was not independently confirmed in this pass and is presumed to follow Colorado's general conformity to federal taxable income absent a state-specific carve-out.

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 recordedM3bindingin force
  2. T?source not recordedM3non-binding

#

No Colorado-specific outbound restriction, reporting threshold, or travel-rule overlay for cross-border crypto transfers was identified. Cross-border movement of convertible virtual currency to or from Colorado-based persons is governed by the same federal frameworks (FinCEN Travel Rule, OFAC sanctions screening) that apply uniformly across the United States, with no additional state-level layer found.

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 (1)
  1. T?source not recordedM2bindingin force

#

AML/CFT obligations applicable to Colorado-facing crypto businesses (KYC/CDD, travel rule, SAR/STR filing, sanctions screening, recordkeeping, risk assessment) are governed at the federal level by FinCEN/BSA rules and are tracked under the fleet's Financial Integrity Module (FIM) aml_ctf subscription rather than duplicated in this crypto consumer baseline, per module subscription doctrine.

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 – Colorado
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), 12 finding(s), 11 source(s) in the cumulative register.