[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6317554,"mediaKeyId","2372023-1e48c0591c940b0f0d3c3585e60b3ed9","parentId",2372023,"title","Committee reviews House Bill 99 to modernize Alaska money‑transmission law and add crypto provisions","audioSeconds",2039,"startMs",1648000,"endMs",3687000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2372023-1e48c0591c940b0f0d3c3585e60b3ed9&start=1648&end=3687","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2372023-1e48c0591c940b0f0d3c3585e60b3ed9/thumbnail_1648000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6317554/Alaska/Committee-reviews-House-Bill-99-to-modernize-Alaska-moneytransmission-law-and-add-crypto-provisions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6317554-30dcc78a9756fd8815fd704833e80641/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186757&Signature=egUwcVcLJ-LLx8wcd7ukDQOnRR5PIYn7mhvgc0hPA5Bri5bTH6fj3cKOxOz3f1vNIYq3sxWgPcC6dWzLxEq6KnA82Pt9a~hdOof0BrW1KZMgsC98wn1e9mwteVofpLp0g7MyFzCWqtrCsbOlzJUSkTf1Gym8NXuUxuc1Q7eQ-BLOFOA9zuXmsHsmtqyvI0e3pVXZpKWBvOocHwrexGMkpPGtxGjhkP4jDNRoFbBvtVmNmY7UHfNEB-QH7522DuGMdxX5OWRNqVaie0ZkdficZV93xvcBDzfR5sgRfPUJaQU4vGrjqvnKSBtRdggM6rS~jT02Lwm3Hhyeq15tcj1f4g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Alaska Legislature","date","2025-02-21T00:00:00Z","article","The House Labor and Commerce Committee heard an introductory presentation on House Bill 99 on Feb. 21, 2025, a departmental bill that would modernize Alaska’s money‑transmission statute to explicitly cover virtual currency, expand licensing and record‑keeping requirements, and give the Division of Banking and Securities broader examination and enforcement authority.

Representative Zach Fields, the bill sponsor, said HB 99 updates Alaska’s framework to “bring [it] in line” with modern payment systems and to give state regulators tools to combat criminal misuse of virtual currency. “This is a crime fighting bill, and we are just giving the department the tools they need,” Fields said.

Tracy Reno, chief of examinations for the Division of Banking and Securities (DBS), walked the committee through adoption rationale and data showing rapid growth in mobile payments and crypto transmission. Reno said the division recorded money‑transmission volumes that grew from about $1.6 billion in 2019 to more than $7 billion in 2021, with annual volume of about $4.5 billion in 2023. “Alaskans use money transmission, particularly mobile payments like Cash App and Venmo, thousands of times an hour to transfer billions of dollars each year,” Reno said. She told members the current act dates from 2007–08 and predates smartphone‑based payments and most virtual currencies.

Evan Anderson, staff to Representative Fields, summarized the bill’s structure: it replaces the currency‑exchange license with a single money‑transmission license that includes virtual‑currency activity; requires criminal background checks for senior management; extends record‑keeping from three to five years; requires annual audited financial statements within 90 days of a licensee’s fiscal year end; adopts tiered net‑worth and prudential standards to replace a flat $25,000 minimum; and creates transitional provisions for existing licensees. The sectional analysis included a proposed effective date of Jan. 1, 2026.

Reno and DBS Director Robert Schmidt told the committee the draft also ensures that, in the event of an exchange bankruptcy, customer crypto balances would be treated as the customer’s property rather than an exchange asset — a point tied to consumer losses in the collapses of major exchanges in 2022. “This bill contains a specific provision regarding crypto that a crypto account is the property of the customer,” Reno said.

Members asked for examples of transmission types (Reno and examiner Dean Fleer described mobile‑payment apps such as Venmo and Cash App as money transmission; cryptocurrency examples included Bitcoin and Ethereum; stored‑value cards were illustrated by retail‑sold reloadable cards). Representative Sadler asked whether federal regulatory changes might make state updates obsolete; Director Schmidt argued the states retain a central role in money‑transmission oversight and said the current federal posture supports continued state regulation.

Committee discussion did not result in a vote. Representative Hall noted time constraints and the committee chair set HB 99 aside for further consideration at a later date. Staff indicated the bill had been introduced in prior sessions and that near‑identical companion measures had reached Senate Rules and House Finance in the previous year without final passage.

Committee members signaled the need for detailed follow‑up work on technical provisions, including examination cost recovery, fee schedules linked to in‑state transmission volume, and operational questions about authorized delegates (agents) and confidentiality/examination procedures.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","LABOR & COMMERCE 02/21/2025 ","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 99 would overhaul the Alaska Uniform Money Services Act (AS 6.55), expand licensing and examination powers, add virtual‑currency provisions and set a Jan. 1, 2026 effective date; the Division of Banking and Securities told the committee the update aims to protect consumers and reduce regulatory gaps as mobile payments and crypto grow.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature Alaska, Alaska","taxId",78559,"location","Alaska","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6317559,"Committee hears bill to raise in‑state price premium for Alaska‑grown food",1203,305000,1508000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2372023-1e48c0591c940b0f0d3c3585e60b3ed9&start=305&end=1508","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2372023-1e48c0591c940b0f0d3c3585e60b3ed9/thumbnail_305000.jpg","/articles/6317559/Alaska/Committee-hears-bill-to-raise-instate-price-premium-for-Alaskagrown-food","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6317559-f2ca87a33218bb648e17669395ebd750/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186757&Signature=dkeTyh6SfZAh5Si7EfKjwywNHIOCHiYZwkQJrsfovGi8Uib-YmHsYf9rdxKZlX~88EO9BSjKP5zHz~h~CkxA3VwaQp22gONJQetj6xifhuRWQXs45S6-ZTYaVvZMoZi52O8EX4ixedY~9lcevitzwP4dhfVvJHoaJsyEPQ1IMwF-pOGW7PODHyxgdO8DhTO53DaR2kSy-Q9soGuVwLJrWjnhcdigrbfHtITOP7no6A8O1v5hciuyEt-cCJ98x4PxjeVO23gFxlJjo7ZlqcQhfBWYJJKuiuyYmVlWiNmF0IwTeXtpjkmsSmADCEbcSmwg8DOuOC5J1bIv~07CIjcOLA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Labor and Commerce Committee co‑chairs opened an introductory hearing on House Bill 60 on Feb. 21, 2025, a governor‑requested bill that would raise the in‑state procurement price differential for Alaska‑harvested agricultural and seafood products.

The bill would change the required in‑state purchase threshold from 7% to 10% and raise the permissible premium from 15% to 25% under state procurement rules, giving agencies more leeway to buy Alaska‑sourced foods even when they cost more than out‑of‑state alternatives.

Deputy Commissioner Anna Latham of the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development said the administration advanced the bill as part of a broader food‑security effort prompted by pandemic supply‑chain disruptions. “This was really a a result of the administration taking a hard look at food security in Alaska,” Latham said, noting the administration’s earlier creation of an Alaska Food Security and Independence Task Force by Administrative Order 331 (2022). She told the committee that the change is intended to be incremental so as not to disrupt school districts or municipalities.

Latham said the current procurement process routes many institutional food purchases through a master contract with US Foods, where agencies can filter for Alaska‑grown items. She said available Alaska products on that platform are limited in winter months: “I did a recent search, and potatoes and lettuce were the only things that were available.” Tom Mayer, chief procurement officer with the Department of Administration, clarified the spending figures presented by staff: “That’s not $17,000,000 on just agricultural fish. That’s $17,000,000 on all food products purchased through the US Foods contract.” Latham added that only about $236,000 of the state’s roughly $17,000,000 in contract purchases were for products harvested in Alaska, a share she calculated as roughly 0.014 of total spend.

Members asked about cost impacts for rural school districts and municipalities, shipping and storage constraints, and whether the premium in the proposal would be sufficient to bring more producers into institutional markets. Representative Burke raised concern that freight and processing costs could make Alaska products more expensive for remote communities. Latham said the administration received a Farm Bureau‑University of Alaska Fairbanks analysis suggesting in‑state procurement can reduce some costs by cutting waste in processing and shipping, and she offered to provide that material to committee members.

Representatives also queried whether large institutional purchasers such as the Department of Corrections could contract for larger guaranteed purchases to help scale production; Latham said the department has had preliminary conversations and would follow up with more detail. Committee discussion did not produce a final vote; the committee chair set HB 60 aside for consideration at a later date.

The hearing record shows the bill targets only agricultural and fisheries products and does not affect other procurement categories such as timber or steel. It also notes that corporate agencies with separate procurement codes are exempt. Staff emphasized that the proposal is an incremental change—3 percentage points on the required threshold and 10 points on the permissible premium—intended to improve market access for Alaska producers without immediate disruptive effects on institutional budgets.

Committee members said they want more granular cost examples for rural hub communities and additional information about seasonal availability, storage and vendor participation on US Foods before advancing the bill.

No formal action or vote was recorded; the committee will consider the bill at a future meeting.","The House Labor and Commerce Committee received an introductory presentation on House Bill 60, which would raise the in‑state procurement price threshold for Alaska‑harvested agricultural and seafood products to encourage institutional purchases by state agencies, school districts and municipalities.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee reviews House Bill 99 to modernize Alaska money‑transmission law and add crypto provisions

Committee hears bill to raise in‑state price premium for Alaska‑grown food