Minnesota Law Enables Banks to Custody Crypto, Bans Public Kiosks to Curb Fraud

May 18, 2026
Minnesota Law Enables Banks to Custody Crypto, Bans Public Kiosks to Curb Fraud
  • The bill received broad bipartisan support and aligns with efforts to protect consumers from scam schemes tied to digital-asset kiosks.

  • Regulators intend ongoing monitoring and enforcement to ensure consumer protection, asset security, and proper AML/KYC controls in custody operations.

  • The policy sits within a broader federal and cross-border context, as U.S. and Canadian authorities explore custody charters and tighter crypto oversight.

  • The statute emphasizes third-party risk management, asset segregation, and clear accounting for crypto holdings, signaling evolving supervisory expectations for custody providers.

  • Implementation specifics: kiosks must be removed from public access by December 31, and the August 1 effective date triggers heightened compliance for operators and financial institutions.

  • Industry reaction notes growing institutional interest in regulated custody, though implementation will hinge on security and governance standards.

  • The measure requires strict asset segregation, risk controls, and allows third-party custodians while keeping institutions fully responsible; regulators can pause unsafe activities and require notices 60 days before launch.

  • The law aims to curb crypto kiosk fraud by banning public access kiosks and mandating their removal by year-end, while safeguarding legitimate custody services within regulated channels.

  • Minnesota passed HF 3709, authorizing state-chartered banks and credit unions to custody digital assets like bitcoin, with the new framework taking effect August 1, 2026.

  • Industry players argue that the ban could hinder legitimate users and call for regulation rather than outright prohibition, with some urging reconsideration.

  • Institutions must implement robust business continuity plans to protect the financial ecosystem against disruptions.

  • Concerns about fraud, predatory fees, and traceability of kiosk transactions fueled support for the ban and state intervention.

Summary based on 11 sources


Get a daily email with more Crypto stories

More Stories