The New Hampshire Executive Council voted 3-2 on Wednesday to reject a proposal that would have authorized the issuance of up to $100 million in municipal bonds backed by Bitcoin (BTC). The bond, proposed by private Bitcoin mining firm CleanSpark and promoted by the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority (BFA) and Governor Kelly Ayotte, was structured to be fully collateralized by CleanSpark’s assets, meaning the state would have faced no direct financial liability.
The three-year maturity bond had already cleared risk assessments by Moody’s, and its structure was designed to insulate taxpayers from Bitcoin’s price swings. If Bitcoin’s price rose during the term, the generated fees would have been retained by the state to fund economic development, housing, and childcare programs. However, opponents like Democrat Karen Liot Hill cited the cryptocurrency’s immaturity and high historical volatility, arguing that the proposal would grant legitimacy to an emerging asset class without sufficient regulatory clarity.
Councilors Janet Stevens and David Wheeler joined Liot Hill in voting no, while Joseph Kenney and John Stephen supported the measure. BFA Executive Director James Key-Wallace contended that digital assets have already completed their institutional consolidation phase, but the council remained unconvinced.
The rejection is notable because New Hampshire has long been considered crypto-friendly, having recently passed a law allowing the state treasurer to invest public funds in cryptocurrencies and establishing a state strategic Bitcoin reserve. Governor Ayotte defended the proposal, emphasizing the need to maintain financial innovation policies in the region. The BFA indicated it may revisit similar structures in the future after further technical sessions.
For the broader crypto industry, the vote underscores the difficulty of integrating digital assets into public finance. While Bitcoin has gained institutional acceptance as an investment, its use as collateral for government-backed bonds remains a frontier most policymakers are not yet ready to cross. The decision may discourage other states from pursuing analogous initiatives, at least until market volatility subsides or federal regulations clarify.
