Florida is back with another attempt to put Bitcoin on the state’s balance sheet. The new bill, HB 183revives last year’s failed attempt, but with sharper teeth and greater reach.
It re-establishes a cap of 10% on certain sovereign wealth funds that can be allocated to digital assets, including Bitcoin and regulated ETFs. But while the 2025 bill was mainly an ambitious gesture, this reads like a working blueprint.
It describes how custody works, who can make the calls and even what happens if the state loses control of his private keys.
The bill is long and detailed, and for good reason: HB 183 is intended to show that Florida can actually hold crypto in a way that will pass audit.
It defines digital assets as Bitcoin, tokenized securities and other cryptographically registered instruments under Florida’s electronic records laws. It also opens the door to exchange-traded products that include digital assets in addition to stocks or commodities.
That expansion means the state isn’t just talking about stacking Bitcoin. It is positioning itself to gain exposure through SEC-registered ETFs or even tokenized securities, as long as they meet custody and disclosure standards.
The bill designates the Chief Financial Officer as the central actor. The CFO could allocate up to 10% of each sovereign wealth account, from general revenue to trust and agency funds, to approved crypto or ETF instruments.
The same cap applies to the retirement system, where the State Board of Administration could invest up to 10% of the Florida Retirement System Trust Fund. These limits mirror last year’s bill, but clarify that the limit applies per account and not to all funds collectively, effectively expanding the potential pool.
None of it is mandatory, because these are ceilings and not quotas, but the legal authorization is sweeping enough to matter.
The rules for storage and control have been tightened. Any digital assets purchased by the state must remain under ongoing control, either directly in the hands of the CFO or through a qualified custodian who can legally perfect a security interest. If that check expires, the state has five working days to restore it.
Lending is permitted, but only if the loans are fully collateralized, whereby the CFO is generally free to require too much collateral. These are the kinds of operational guardrails designed to answer the question that doomed the first bill: How do you secure the private keys to a state’s finances?
HB 183 even takes into account taxes or fees received in crypto, requiring them to be funneled into general revenue and repaid in dollars, a small but telling sign that its drafters are thinking about accounting friction as much as ideology.
The scale and the stakes
The numbers behind the 10% figure make the bill more than symbolic. The Florida Retirement System holds approximately $218 billion.
A 1% allocation there would be about $2.2 billion, already more than most daily spot Bitcoin ETF flows.
A 5% allocation would be close to $11 billion, and that doesn’t include other sovereign wealth funds, such as the $4.9 billion Budget Stabilization Fund, which could theoretically add hundreds of millions more.
None of these moves would happen overnight, but even a cautious 1% pilot would introduce a new source of stable demand to a market now heavily dependent on ETFs for inflows.
The legal and political obstacles remain steep. The bill exempts crypto holdings from some of the state’s security rules for public deposits, but that doesn’t solve the larger problem of volatility and fiduciary risk. Public resources are based on liquidity and predictability; Bitcoin is neither.
The five-day respite clause may look neat on paper, but it is untested in public sector practice. Accountants will want proof that Florida can document and value these assets as rigorously as its government bonds or stocks.
There’s also the issue of timing: Even if the bill passes, each investment council would still have to adjust its own policy statements before addressing crypto.
HB 183, in short, is not a declaration that Florida will buy Bitcoin, but that Florida wants to make it legally possible to do so. It expands the scope from one asset to an entire class, builds in controls and sets the stage for prudent participation rather than speculative bets.
The 10% number draws attention, but the real story lies in the state’s attempt to establish a legal playbook for the safekeeping of sovereign crypto coins.
If that framework survives scrutiny and gains momentum, it could become the first model of its kind in the US: a quiet but profound change in the way governments think about holding digital assets, statute by statute.
