The Massachusetts Senate voted Thursday to prohibit crypto ATMs, adding the measure as an amendment to an omnibus economic development bill.

The move follows FBI figures showing that reported losses tied to crypto kiosk scams in Massachusetts totaled about $7 million last year. Consumer advocates and older residents have said the largely unregulated machines have become a channel for scammers to quickly move victims’ cash into cryptocurrency wallets.

The proposal places Massachusetts in a broader state-by-state fight over how to police crypto kiosks, which can provide a quick cash-to-crypto on-ramp but have also been cited by law enforcement as a tool used in fraud schemes.

Victims are directed to crypto kiosks

Crypto ATMs often resemble traditional cash machines, and hundreds are located in convenience stores, pharmacies and liquor stores across Massachusetts.

Norfolk County Sheriff Patrick McDermott said the scams often begin with a phone call or text message. Victims are then pressured to move savings into Bitcoin. They insert cash into a kiosk, scan a QR code provided by the caller, and the deposit is converted and routed to an anonymous wallet within seconds. Once the money is transferred, recovery is effectively impossible.

The FBI said it received 296 complaints about crypto kiosk scams in Massachusetts in 2025, with reported losses totaling $6,834,561. That equals roughly $19,000 in reported losses per day. Nationally, the bureau said $389 million was stolen through this type of scam over the past year.

AARP Massachusetts has been among the groups pushing for the crackdown. “A ban on crypto ATMs is now the most effective way to stop the ongoing damage,” state director Jen Benson said in a statement Thursday.

Massachusetts has no crypto ATM rules

Massachusetts does not currently have written rules governing crypto kiosks, prompting sheriffs and advocacy organizations to urge lawmakers to shut the machines down at least temporarily. The state is the only one in New England that leaves crypto ATMs unregulated.

Vermont, Minnesota, Indiana and Tennessee have banned the machines outright, while 28 other states impose restrictions on their use. Those restrictions can include limits on transaction size, disclosures or other consumer-protection requirements, rather than a full prohibition.

McDermott said the lack of state-level guardrails has attracted operators to Massachusetts. He said removing the machines is the only available option until a regulatory framework is in place.

Thursday’s Senate vote does not immediately change the law. The ban was attached to the Senate’s broad economic development bill, which the chamber approved late Thursday night.

Similar language has already been considered twice by the House, once in its version of the economic development bill and once in an earlier budget proposal. It failed both times. The proposal’s fate now depends on whether the House and Senate can reconcile their bills.