Arizona’s crypto ATM consumer protection law helped 35 scam victims recover $171,332 in full refunds since taking effect last year. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said Wednesday that her office helped obtain the refunds since the state’s Cryptocurrency Kiosk License Fraud Prevention law took effect on Sept. 26, 2025.
The recoveries work out to roughly $4,895 per victim, although the state did not disclose individual refund amounts or how many claims were rejected or are still unresolved.
Statement from Attorney General Kris Mayes
Losses involving cryptocurrency kiosks are rising nationwide. FBI data that was released in May showed that Arizona residents filed 460 complaints involving crypto kiosks in 2025, and reported $14.53 million in adjusted losses. Across the US, the FBI received 13,460 complaints involving kiosks and almost $389 million in reported losses, up 23% and 58%, respectively, from 2024.
The FBI warns that those loss figures cannot be attributed exclusively to crypto ATM transactions because some complaints also involved other payment methods. More than half of the nationwide kiosk complaints nevertheless came from people over 50, who reported more than $302 million in losses.
Arizona tests refunds instead of a crypto ATM ban
Arizona’s approach differs from states that decided fraud risks outweigh the legitimate uses of cryptocurrency kiosks.
HB 2387, enacted as Chapter 171 in 2025, allows crypto ATMs to continue operating but imposes transaction limits, fraud-monitoring requirements and a refund obligation for qualifying new customers. A new customer is someone who has been with an operator for fewer than 10 days.
New customers are limited to $2,000 in transactions per day across an operator’s kiosks, while existing customers face a $10,500 daily ceiling. Operators must also maintain 24-hour customer service, provide transaction receipts and use blockchain analytics and tracing software intended to stop transfers to wallets already known to be associated with fraud.
Most importantly for victims, a new customer who was fraudulently induced into a transaction can receive a full refund, including associated fees. The customer must contact both the kiosk operator and either law enforcement or the Attorney General’s Office within 30 days and provide the operator with a report determining that the transaction was fraudulently induced. Required warning screens and disclosures do not remove the operator’s refund obligation when those conditions are satisfied.
Mayes urged victims to report suspected fraud immediately, and warned that missing the 30-day deadline could also mean losing eligibility for reimbursement.
States are splitting over how to regulate crypto ATMs
Arizona is not alone in trying a refund-based model. Colorado’s Vending of Digital Assets Act, which took effect Jan. 1, introduced the same $2,000 daily limit for new customers and $10,500 limit for existing customers. Colorado also requires refunds in certain fraud cases, although its rules differ from Arizona’s.
Under Colorado’s law, a customer’s first transaction can qualify for a full refund when funds were sent to a cryptocurrency wallet or exchange outside the US and the customer reports the fraud within 60 days. Colorado defines a new customer as someone who has used the operator for fewer than seven days.
Other states are moving further. Tennessee’s Public Chapter 766 makes it a Class A misdemeanor to knowingly install, operate or permit a virtual currency kiosk. The ban took effect July 1, 2026, and survived an early legal challenge when a federal court declined to temporarily block its enforcement. The underlying lawsuit against the ban is continuing.
Indiana lawmakers have also enacted HB 1116, which prohibits the operation of virtual currency kiosks in the state. The measure became Public Law 143 after being signed by the governor in March.
That leaves states very divided between two models: allowing crypto ATMs while forcing operators to absorb some fraud losses, or removing the machines altogether.
Arizona’s $171,332 recovery figure does not yet establish which approach is more effective. The state has not disclosed the total number or value of refund applications, and the FBI’s $14.53 million Arizona loss figure covers the whole of 2025 while the refund law only took effect in late September and applies to a limited group of new customers.
Still, the 35 completed refunds provide evidence that Arizona’s reimbursement mechanism is producing actual recoveries rather than functioning only as a disclosure requirement.
