Politics

Pennsylvania Lawmakers Target Bitcoin: Can This Bill Protect Officials From Conflicts of Interest?

August 22, 2025, 9:20 AM

A photograph showing the Pennsylvania State Capitol building with its green dome from the perspective of a tree-lined street with parked cars.

A view of the Pennsylvania State Capitol building in Harrisburg, with its iconic dome dominating the end of a street. By Miami Daily Life / MiamiDaily.Life.

Executive Summary

Pennsylvania House Bill 1812 proposes to ban state public officials and their immediate families from owning or transacting in Bitcoin and other digital assets to prevent conflicts of interest.

The proposed legislation is comprehensive, covering a wide array of digital assets and indirect holdings, with a mandate for divestment within two months of assuming office and severe penalties for non-compliance, including potential jail time and a $50,000 fine.

This bill highlights a growing bipartisan concern over potential conflicts of interest, aligning with similar federal initiatives, such as those addressing claims regarding the Trump family’s enrichment through Donald Trump’s position as President.

The Story So Far

The introduction of Pennsylvania’s House Bill 1812, aimed at prohibiting public officials and their families from owning or transacting in digital assets, stems from a growing concern over potential conflicts of interest as cryptocurrencies gain mainstream adoption, mirroring a broader bipartisan movement at the federal level to increase scrutiny over public officials’ financial dealings, partly driven by past concerns over enrichment, including those related to the Trump family.

Why This Matters

The introduction of Pennsylvania’s House Bill 1812 signifies a growing legislative effort to prevent potential conflicts of interest among public officials and their families concerning digital assets, reflecting increasing scrutiny as cryptocurrencies gain mainstream adoption. This state-level initiative, which proposes severe penalties for non-compliance, aligns with similar federal proposals, indicating a broader, potentially bipartisan, movement to regulate digital asset ownership within public service and address ethical concerns.

Who Thinks What?

Representative Ben Waxman and his co-sponsors believe that Pennsylvania public officials and their immediate families should be prohibited from owning or transacting in digital assets to prevent potential conflicts of interest.

Congressman Ritchie Torres, Senator Adam Schiff, and others advocate for similar federal-level restrictions on digital asset ownership for public officials, driven by increasing scrutiny over financial dealings and to address potential ethical concerns, partly stemming from discontent regarding claims of the Trump family’s enrichment.

Pennsylvania lawmakers have introduced House Bill 1812, a legislative proposal aimed at prohibiting public officials and their immediate families from owning or engaging in transactions involving Bitcoin and other digital assets. Sponsored by Representative Ben Waxman and seven co-sponsors, the bill seeks to amend the state’s ethics and financial disclosure laws to prevent potential conflicts of interest as digital assets gain mainstream adoption.

Scope of the Proposed Ban

The proposed legislation is comprehensive, extending beyond just Bitcoin to include a wide array of digital assets. This encompasses alternative cryptocurrencies, including memecoins, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), and even stablecoins.

Furthermore, the bill would prohibit public officials and their families from holding crypto indirectly through funds, trusts, or other investment vehicles. Cryptocurrency derivatives and exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which have seen significant adoption recently, are also included in the ban.

Divestment and Penalties

Under the proposed bill, any state official currently holding these asset classes would be mandated to divest their digital asset holdings within two months of assuming office. The restrictions would also extend for up to one year after they leave their government positions.

Non-compliance with the bill’s provisions could lead to severe consequences. Violators could face potential jail time, a civil penalty of up to $50,000, and would be punished as felons.

Legislative Status and Broader Context

House Bill 1812 has been referred to the Committee on State Government, marking an early stage in the legislative process. Its ultimate passage remains uncertain at this point.

The introduction of this bill highlights a growing bipartisan concern regarding potential conflicts of interest, particularly as digital assets continue to integrate into the financial landscape. While no federal ban currently exists for members of Congress on holding Bitcoin, they are subject to existing disclosure laws.

Similar Federal Initiatives

The Pennsylvania bill aligns with similar proposals at the federal level, driven by increasing scrutiny over financial dealings of public officials. The source article indicates that some officials express discontent with claims regarding the Trump family’s enrichment through Donald Trump’s position as President.

Notable federal proposals include Congressman Ritchie Torres’ “Stop Presidential Profiteering from Digital Assets Act” and Senator Adam Schiff’s “Curbing Officials’ Income and Nondisclosure (COIN) Act.” Both aim to impose comparable restrictions on federal officials, reflecting a broader movement to address potential ethical concerns surrounding digital asset ownership in public service.