Main Points:
- Florida’s HB 487 and SB 550 “indefinitely postponed” due to legislative scheduling and volatility concerns
- Lawmakers extended session only for budget matters; crypto bills received low priority
- Similar proposals in Wyoming, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, and others also failed this year
- Arizona’s related bills advanced but vetoed by Governor Hobbs over “untested investment” fears
- Proponents vow to reintroduce next session; federal regulatory clarity could bolster future efforts
1. Background: What Were HB 487 and SB 550?
In February 2025, Florida legislators introduced two companion bills—House Bill 487 and Senate Bill 550—aimed at allowing the State Board of Administration and the Chief Financial Officer to invest up to 10 percent of certain state funds, including the General Revenue Fund and Budget Stabilization Fund, into Bitcoin (BTC) . Together, these bills sought to:
- Create a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve under state control
- Permit lending of BTC and use in exchange-traded products, subject to custody controls
- Diversify the state’s treasury portfolio as a hedge against inflation and currency devaluation
Proponents argued that Bitcoin’s long-term performance and scarcity profile offered an innovative diversification tool for public pensions and reserves. Opponents raised alarms over Bitcoin’s notorious price swings and uncertain federal regulatory outlook.
2. Why Did Florida Postpone the Bills Indefinitely?
2.1 Legislative Scheduling Constraints
When Florida’s regular session adjourned on May 2, 2025, lawmakers had passed roughly 230 bills on topics ranging from water fluoridation bans to education reforms, but the Bitcoin reserve proposals never reached a final floor vote. Though the legislature briefly extended until June 6 for budget-specific votes, crypto legislation was explicitly excluded from that extension.
2.2 Volatility and Risk Concerns
Within legislative debates, critics emphasized Bitcoin’s historical drawdowns—sometimes exceeding 50 percent—and flagged the state’s use of public pension assets as particularly vulnerable to such swings. Additionally, the lack of unified federal rules on state-level cryptocurrency investments added to lawmakers’ reluctance to proceed.
3. State-Level Trends: A Broader Setback
Florida’s retreat is part of a nationwide pattern. This session, over 45 similar bills were filed across more than 20 states, yet very few navigated committee hurdles:
| State | Bill Status |
|---|---|
| Wyoming | Failed to clear committee |
| Pennsylvania | Narrowly defeated in floor vote |
| Oklahoma | Voted down in committee after bipartisan pushback |
| South Dakota | Did not receive a hearing |
| Montana | Stalled in appropriations committee |
| North Dakota | Remains in initial committee phase |
Source: Bitcoin Laws data, May 2025
These repeated legislative hurdles underscore the political sensitivity of allocating public funds to a volatile digital asset.
4. Arizona’s Parallel Journey and Veto
Just days before Florida’s session end, Arizona saw its own bills (HB 1025/SB 1373) reach the finish line—only to be vetoed by Governor Katie Hobbs on May 3, 2025. In her veto message, Hobbs labeled Bitcoin an “untested investment” and cautioned that retirement funds should not be used for experiments without reliable track records.
Despite this setback, Arizona still maintains two pending proposals:
- HB 2749: Seeks to fund a crypto reserve via unclaimed property proceeds
- SB 1373: Mirrors Florida’s 10 percent allocation structure
Bitcoin advocates in Arizona remain optimistic, pointing to the state’s robust blockchain business community and ongoing budget negotiations as potential vehicles for resurrecting crypto language before the next session adjourns.
5. Proponents’ Arguments: Why the Effort Isn’t Over
Leaders like Former CFO Jimmy Patronis and Senator Jay Gloor have publicly stated their intent to reintroduce these measures. In October 2024, Patronis penned a letter to the State Board of Administration urging maximum returns for public-sector pensions—citing Bitcoin as “an increasingly attractive option”. Similarly, industry groups such as the Florida Blockchain Business Association argue that legislative momentum can be regained through:
- Budgetline amendments to reinsert crypto language
- Educational campaigns to address volatility misconceptions
- Waiting for greater federal clarity from agencies like the SEC or CFTC
Samuel Armes, the association’s founder, noted that despite the public perception of defeat, “we have another month to keep pushing” via interim budget talks.
6. What Will It Take for a Successful Reintroduction?
6.1 Securing Legislative Floor Time
Next session, bill sponsors will need earlier committee scheduling and possible combined hearings with related fiscal policy bills to avoid crowding out.
6.2 Addressing Price-Volatility Head-On
- Propose volatility buffers or stop-loss mechanisms to cap potential drawdowns
- Stage pilot programs investing a smaller percentage (e.g., 1–2 percent) before scaling
6.3 Federal Regulatory Signals
A clear SEC stance on Bitcoin spot ETFs or a CFTC designation of Bitcoin as a commodity could de-risk state ventures by reducing legal uncertainty.
7. Conclusion
Florida’s decision to withdraw HB 487 and SB 550 represents a significant pause but not an end to the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve movement. While state-level proponents face scheduling constraints and volatility concerns, they remain determined to refine their approach and reengage lawmakers next session. With similar setbacks experienced nationwide and notable vetoes in Arizona, the push for public-sector crypto diversification has proven more politically complex than anticipated. Still, with enhanced risk controls, federal clarity, and strategic budgeting maneuvers, the dream of embedding Bitcoin into state treasuries may yet be realized in future legislative sessions.
