Illinois approves digital asset tax in state budget

Traders Union
All News
Crypto
Illinois digital asset tax

Highlights

Illinois approves a 0.2% tax on digital asset business activity, applying to firms with at least $100,000 in gross receipts, effective January 1, 2027.
Industry backlash highlights that Illinois' measure uniquely taxes digital asset transactions, with critics noting there is no similar tax on stocks, bonds, or derivatives nationally.
Unclear language in the law could extend taxation scope to electronic bank transfers, and legal challenges are expected, though no lawsuits have been filed yet.

Tax measure and implementation timeline

As reported by CoinDesk, the new provision taxes "receiving any digital asset business activity" at 0.2%, covering single instances of exchanging, transferring or storing a digital asset as part of a business or on behalf of a customer.

The legislation applies to firms based in Illinois or serving state residents if they record at least $100,000 in total gross receipts. A person following the process says the tax is expected to raise about $60 million, and the measure takes effect on Jan. 1, 2027.

Two people familiar with the matter say the provision is added late to the broader budget bill, limiting the opportunity for industry input before passage. Illinois lawmakers are now out of session for the rest of the year, though a fall veto session could still offer a narrow opening if the governor chooses to use a line-item veto.

Industry backlash and broader financial impact

The crypto industry is arguing that the tax targets digital assets in a way not applied to other financial products. In a June 16 letter to the governor, the Crypto Council for Innovation says the law taxes everyday use of exchange, transfer and custody services rather than income, gains or profits, and warns that there is no comparable state financial transaction tax on stocks, bonds or derivatives elsewhere in the country.

Questions also remain over how broadly the wording may reach. NYU Stern School of Business Adjunct Professor Austin Campbell says on X that the language may extend beyond crypto assets to other forms of digital money, including electronic bank transfers.

One person following the process says litigation is the likeliest path to changing or limiting the tax, though no lawsuit has been filed yet. The measure stands in contrast to Illinois' earlier Digital Assets and Consumer Protection Act, which some industry policy figures describe as a more constructive framework for blockchain oversight.

Our earlier article on the IRS Electronic Tax Administration Advisory Committee’s 2026 annual report outlined proposals to modernize U.S. digital tax administration and improve taxpayer service. It highlighted recommendations urging predictable IRS funding, technology upgrades, fraud-prevention measures, and clearer oversight of tax preparers—priorities that frame how authorities may implement and enforce new rules affecting digitally mediated financial activity.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.