• According to the report, users from California accounted for 43 percent of all the web searches for Bitcoin and Ethereum.

• The Crypto bill proposed by California Assembly member Timothy Grayson awaits just the signature of the Governor.

Research by CoinGecko reveals that California is the most crypto-inquisitive state in the US. According to the report, users from the state accounted for 43 percent of all the web searches for Bitcoin and Ethereum between May 2 to Aug. 21, 2022, on the crypto tracking site. The report further mentions that other states interested in the two cryptos are Illinois, New York, Florida, and Washington, followed by Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Georgia, and Arizona. 

Bobby Ong, chief operating officer and co-founder of Coingecko explained that most searches on the site across the 20 states were about Bitcoin. However, four states saw more searches for Ethereum compared to Bitcoin.

What’s especially notable is Colorado, Wisconsin, New Jersey, and Florida’s interest in Ethereum over Bitcoin. It remains to be seen how these rankings and market shares will play out in the coming months, with Ethereum’s Merge around the corner.

Ong further stated that California is a major technological hub and a home to Silicon Valley. Also, the likes of The Graph, Helium, MakerDAO, and dYdX have a presence in the state. For this reason, it is not surprising that it tops the state with the most cryptocurrency interest.

Just a stroke of a pen is needed to get the crypto bill established

The crypto bill AB 2269 proposed by California Assembly member Timothy Grayson was on Monday approved by the Senate, and only awaits the signature of California Governor Gavin Newsom to be enacted into law.

According to Grayson, the bill is expected to protect California residents from “financial hardship and foster responsible innovation by licensing and regulating the activities of cryptocurrency exchanges.” In addition, digital financial asset companies would be licensed under the Department of Financial Innovation and Protection (DFPI). In this case, the crypto sector would benefit from the provision of regulatory clarity while establishing protection for consumers. 

He believes that the emanation of crypto poses a serious risk to consumers as the industry is not well regulated. The crypto market cap surpassed $3 trillion last November before taking a nosedive. Unfortunately, the desperation of investors has largely been taken advantage of as they have become victims of bad actors who perpetrate fraud and insider trading. 

While the newness of cryptocurrency is part of what makes investing exciting, it also makes it riskier for consumers because cryptocurrency businesses are not adequately regulated and do not have to follow many of the same rules that apply to everyone else.

Crypto bill AB 2269 is necessary according to Robert Herrell

Robert Herrell, Executive Director of the Consumer Federation of California, also added that consumers deserve basic protections to protect them from fraud by financial schemes. According to him, hundreds of millions in self-promotion should not overshadow the importance of crafting measures to protect consumers. He further added that CFC would work with Grayson on this legislation. 

The bill is said to provide basic but necessary protection to consumers and ensure that the crypto market is safe to operate. 

Regardless, the bill has attracted opposition with the Blockchain Association stating that it could affect Innovation. California is seen as a hub for technological innovation. Citing the order issued by the governor about fostering the next move of innovation, it was mentioned that the bill would create shortsightedness and restrictions which do not match the vision of the state.  

The bill’s licensing provisions are designed to install the same type of onerous licensing and reporting regime that has stunted the growth of the crypto industry and limited access to safe and reliable crypto products and services in New York.

It is reported that the bill would take effect from 2025. However, the governor has until September 30 to sign or veto the bill. For now, it is unknown whether he will sign or not.