- Trending
- Comments
- Latest
A South Dakota lawmaker has reintroduced legislation allowing the state to allocate up to 10% of public investment funds into bitcoin, marking a second attempt after a similar measure was procedurally blocked in 2025.
Republican Representative Logan Manhart filed House Bill 1155 on January 27, 2026, targeting the state’s Investment Council for expanded digital asset authority.
Republican Representative Logan Manhart filed HB 1155 on Jan. 27, 2026, echoing a 2025 version that failed to advance before the legislative session ended.
The bill would expand the list of permissible assets for the state’s Investment Council to include digital assets like Bitcoin, alongside traditional securities.
Manhart, representing South Dakota’s First District, signalled his intent on social media with a brief post on X (formerly Twitter):
“Strong money. Strong state.”
If enacted, the measure would allow the state to gain exposure to Bitcoin through direct holdings, qualified custodians, or regulated exchange-traded products (ETPs).
It also outlines enhanced custody and security measures, including encrypted storage, multi-party governance controls, and regular audits to protect state assets.
Last year’s attempt to amend state investment statutes (House Bill 1202) was effectively killed when lawmakers deferred it beyond South Dakota’s 40-day session limit.
This was a procedural move that prevented a full vote. Representative Manhart said at the time that he planned to bring back the proposal in 2026.
The current effort follows broader interest among U.S. states in integrating digital assets into public financial strategies.
States such as Texas, Arizona, and New Hampshire have passed legislation allowing state-level Bitcoin reserves or crypto holdings under certain conditions, while other legislatures continue debating similar frameworks.
“This bill is about modernising our investment policy to reflect the evolving financial landscape. Bitcoin and other digital assets are increasingly seen as potential stores of value, but they come with unique risks that policymakers must carefully manage.”
Alicia Dawson, a policy analyst specialising in state public finance, said as he was interviewed by Crypto Economy.
Critics of state-level Bitcoin allocations argue that the asset’s price volatility and limited regulatory oversight could expose taxpayers to undue risk.
Similar concerns were raised when the 2025 bill was deferred, with some lawmakers questioning whether Bitcoin belongs in public portfolios that are traditionally dominated by bonds and equities.
The bill’s progress, from committee hearings to potential floor votes—could signal growing institutional acceptance of Bitcoin beyond private portfolios.
HB 1155’s referral to the Committee on Commerce and Energy is its first procedural step; the measure must survive committee review before reaching a full chamber vote, amendments, and possible enactment.
Market watchers note that state-level adoption of Bitcoin funds remains rare but not unprecedented.
Texas and Arizona, for example, have enacted frameworks that permit Bitcoin or seized crypto holdings under specific safeguards, adding to a patchwork of U.S. crypto policy approaches.
HB 1155 now awaits committee consideration and debate in the South Dakota legislature, where it faces scrutiny from both supporters and opponents.
Lawmakers will weigh whether allowing Bitcoin in public investment pools aligns with fiscal responsibility and long-term financial strategy.
Beyond South Dakota, similar bills in other states could gain momentum if this measure advances, reflecting a growing trend of local governments reassessing the role of digital assets in public finance.
