North Carolina Senate Overrides Governor’s Veto to Pass Federal CBDC Ban Bill

The North Carolina Senate recently made headlines by overriding Governor Roy Cooper’s veto to pass a bill banning the state’s acceptance of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) or subdivisions.

Overview

On September 9 2024, the Republican-controlled Senate passed House Bill 690 with a 27-17 vote, just exceeding the 60% majority required to override the veto of Democratic Governor Roy Cooper and enact the bill into law. This decision followed the North Carolina House’s vote in early August to override Cooper’s veto with a 73-41 vote. Senate Bill 680, commonly called the “Fed CBDC Ban Bill,” has sparked debate across the political spectrum. The bill prohibits North Carolina from recognising any CBDC issued by the Federal Reserve or other central banks as legal tender within the state, representing a significant step in the broader national debate surrounding digital currencies and state sovereignty. 

The bill’s passage marks an important development in the ongoing conversation about CBDCs’ role in the United States (US). While proponents argue that CBDCs could offer a more efficient and secure payment system, critics contend they could undermine financial privacy and grant excessive control to central authorities. Head of the analyst at Blockware Solutions, Mitchell Askew, mentioned that it was terrific to see CBDCs officially prohibited in his home state. Still, he expressed dissatisfaction with the way the Senate vote unfolded. Askew said, “12 Democrats flipping their position to support the veto confirms my initial hypothesis that the veto was due to Cooper playing partisan politics.”

Bill Details and Legislative Journey

Senate Bill 680 was introduced earlier this year by a group of Republican lawmakers who raised concerns about the implications of a federally issued CBDC. The bill states that no CBDC issued by the Federal Reserve or any other central bank shall be recognised as legal tender in North Carolina. Moreover, the bill prohibits any government entity in the state from accepting a CBDC as payment for debts, taxes, fees, or any other obligations. On July 31 2024, the Federal Reserve researched CBDCs, and its Chair, Jerome Powell, stated that “there’s really nothing new happening regarding a US-issued CBDC.”  The legislation quickly gained traction among Republican North Carolina House and Senate legislators. In his veto message, Governor Cooper argued that the bill was premature and potentially harmful to future financial innovation. 

“We should not close the door on any potential technology that could enhance our financial system,” Cooper stated. However, his veto was short-lived. The Republican-controlled Senate and House promptly voted to override the veto, with votes of 30-19 and 73-46, respectively, along party lines. Key bill proponents, such as State Senator Jim Perry, argued that the legislation is essential for preserving financial privacy and limiting federal overreach. “CBDCs represent a direct threat to the financial autonomy of every American. This bill ensures that North Carolina will not participate in such a system,” Perry stated during the Senate debate. Critics of the bill, however, argue that the legislation is a symbolic gesture with little practical impact. They claim that a state-level ban on a federally issued currency is legally dubious and could lead to costly legal battles.

Political Dynamics and Broader Implications

The override of Governor Cooper’s veto highlights the ongoing partisan divide over CBDCs in the United States. While Democrats generally view CBDCs as a potential tool for enhancing financial inclusion and modernising payment systems, Republicans tend to focus on concerns related to privacy, government overreach, and the potential for a surveillance state. This ideological divide was evident in the debates preceding the veto override, with lawmakers from both sides of the aisle presenting starkly contrasting visions of the future of money. The passage of the CBDC ban bill in North Carolina could set a precedent for other states, particularly those with Republican-controlled legislatures, to pursue similar legislation. Several states, including Texas and Florida, have already introduced or passed bills to curb the use of CBDCs within their jurisdictions.

The legal standing of these bills remains a contentious issue, as the Constitution grants the federal government the authority to regulate currency. However, the growing number of state-level actions against CBDCs suggests a broader pushback against federal monetary policies perceived as overreaching. Moreover, the debate over CBDCs is not confined to state legislatures. On the federal level, several lawmakers have expressed concerns about the potential risks a US-issued CBDC poses. Senator Ted Cruz and Congressman Tom Emmer have introduced bills in Congress to limit the Federal Reserve’s authority to issue a digital currency. These efforts underscore the broader national debate about the future of digital currencies in the United States and the balance of power between state and federal authorities. 

Potential Impact on North Carolina’s Financial Landscape

The implications of Senate Bill 680 for North Carolina’s financial landscape are immediate and long-term. In the short term, the bill clearly states the state’s position on CBDCs and reflects a broader doubt about digital currencies in certain political circles. The immediate effect may be largely symbolic, given that the Federal Reserve has not yet issued a CBDC and is still in the exploratory phase regarding its potential development. However, the bill could have more significant implications if the Federal Reserve moves forward with a CBDC. North Carolina’s stance could lead to conflicts between state and federal authorities, particularly concerning the regulation of financial institutions and the enforcement of monetary policy. 

Banks and financial institutions operating within North Carolina may face uncertainty regarding the legal status of CBDCs, potentially complicating their operations and compliance strategies. Furthermore, the ban could influence how businesses and consumers in North Carolina engage with digital currencies more broadly. While the bill does not impact private digital currencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum, its passage could deter future investments in blockchain technology and digital finance within the state. Companies looking to innovate in the fintech sector may perceive the legislative environment as hostile to digital innovation, potentially relocating to more crypto-friendly states.

North Carolina’s decision to override the governor’s veto and pass the Fed CBDC Ban Bill represents a significant moment in the ongoing debate over the role of digital currencies in the United States. While the immediate effects of the bill may be limited, its passage could signal a growing trend among states to assert their sovereignty over financial matters in the face of perceived federal overreach. As the national conversation around CBDCs continues to evolve, actions by state legislatures like North Carolina will undoubtedly play a critical role in shaping the future of money in America.