Iowa Attorney General sues 2 crypto companies, costing Iowans $20 million
DES MOINES, Iowa — Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird is filing lawsuits against two crypto companies accused of costing Iowans $20 million.
Attorney General Bird says an investigation into cryptocurrency ATM companies was opened in October 2023. Using a list of Iowans who sent money through kiosks, 14 crypto ATM companies were subpoenaed. As part of the investigation, Iowan's affected were contacted, and police reports, self-reports, and complaints were investigated.
The office has filed two lawsuits in Polk County District Court against Bitcoin Depot and Coinflip ATM's. Both companies are being sued for violating the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act.
Attorney General Bird says that in less than three years Iowan's sent more than $7 million through Bitcoin Depot and $13 million through CoinFlip ATM's.
Bill allowing Iowa schools to hire unlicensed chaplains advances in House
'Con artists are evil and will stop at nothing to steal everything you have,' said Attorney General Bird. 'We already know that they target older Iowans, but now it seems that they even hunt through obituaries to target widows. They convince these older women that they need help, and then send their victims to crypto ATMs.
According to Attorney General Bird, a majority of scam victims were over the age of 60.
'The crypto ATM companies take a cut of the profits. It's not just wrong, it's illegal. I'm fighting to get Iowans their money back and force the crypto ATM companies to make big changes. No Iowan should get ripped off like this,' said Attorney General Bird.
The investigation indicated that 98% of the money Iowan's sent through Bitcoin Depot were scam transactions. Once money is sent through a crypto ATM, it is gone.
The Attorney General Bird's office says the investigation into crypto ATM companies is ongoing.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Yahoo
Are Retail-Wholesale Stocks Lagging Allbirds, Inc. (BIRD) This Year?
Investors interested in Retail-Wholesale stocks should always be looking to find the best-performing companies in the group. Allbirds, Inc. (BIRD) is a stock that can certainly grab the attention of many investors, but do its recent returns compare favorably to the sector as a whole? By taking a look at the stock's year-to-date performance in comparison to its Retail-Wholesale peers, we might be able to answer that question. Allbirds, Inc. is one of 209 individual stocks in the Retail-Wholesale sector. Collectively, these companies sit at #10 in the Zacks Sector Rank. The Zacks Sector Rank considers 16 different sector groups. The average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks within the groups is measured, and the sectors are listed from best to worst. The Zacks Rank is a successful stock-picking model that emphasizes earnings estimates and estimate revisions. The system highlights a number of different stocks that could be poised to outperform the broader market over the next one to three months. Allbirds, Inc. is currently sporting a Zacks Rank of #2 (Buy). Over the past three months, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for BIRD's full-year earnings has moved 11.3% higher. This means that analyst sentiment is stronger and the stock's earnings outlook is improving. Our latest available data shows that BIRD has returned about 69.6% since the start of the calendar year. At the same time, Retail-Wholesale stocks have gained an average of 1.2%. As we can see, Allbirds, Inc. is performing better than its sector in the calendar year. Another Retail-Wholesale stock, which has outperformed the sector so far this year, is Herbalife Ltd (HLF). The stock has returned 23.5% year-to-date. The consensus estimate for Herbalife Ltd's current year EPS has increased 9.8% over the past three months. The stock currently has a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy). Breaking things down more, Allbirds, Inc. is a member of the Retail - Apparel and Shoes industry, which includes 39 individual companies and currently sits at #168 in the Zacks Industry Rank. On average, stocks in this group have lost 13.6% this year, meaning that BIRD is performing better in terms of year-to-date returns. In contrast, Herbalife Ltd falls under the Retail - Pharmacies and Drug Stores industry. Currently, this industry has 3 stocks and is ranked #4. Since the beginning of the year, the industry has moved +21.9%. Investors interested in the Retail-Wholesale sector may want to keep a close eye on Allbirds, Inc. and Herbalife Ltd as they attempt to continue their solid performance. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Allbirds, Inc. (BIRD) : Free Stock Analysis Report Herbalife Ltd (HLF) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Iowa Republican tensions mount following Reynolds' pipeline bill veto
Rep. Charley Thomson chats with attendees at a rally against CO2 pipelines at the Iowa Capitol Mar. 18, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch) The issue of eminent domain as it pertains to a carbon sequestration pipeline project in Iowa has put Republicans at odds with one another, but Gov. Kim Reynolds' Wednesday decision to veto a bill on the issue has amplified the tensions. On a call with landowners opposed to the pipeline project and upset by the veto, Rep. Steven Holt, a Republican from Denison and one of the lawmakers leading eminent domain and pipeline-related legislation, said there will be 'consequences for the governor's agenda' moving forward. 'The governor's lack of leadership is why we are where we are today, and it will affect her agenda going forward until the end of her term,' Holt said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Landowners on the call were similarly upset by Reynolds' decision, following years of silence on the issue. Peg Rasmussen, who owns land in Montgomery County, said 'a true leader steps in when a problem arises' but 'Reynolds did nothing.' 'The legacy you leave behind is one of bowing down to big business at the expense of Iowans,' Rasmussen said. Tensions around eminent domain and carbon sequestration pipelines have risen in response to proposed projects in Iowa. Three projects, Navigator CO2, Wolf Carbon Solutions and Summit Carbon Solutions have sought to build carbon sequestration pipelines through Iowa. The first two projects were withdrawn, but the Summit project received a permit from the Iowa Utilities Commission in June 2024 and has more than 1,300 voluntary easements signed for the project. Landowners opposed to the pipelines have lobbied for four years against the projects, and in particular their ability to use eminent domain. This year lawmakers narrowly passed House File 639 to change the definition of a common carrier for hazardous liquid pipelines, increase insurance requirements, set permit limits and add requirements to the IUC. Opponents of the bill said it changed the rules in the middle of the game, had unintended consequences to critical energy infrastructure and would stop Iowa from leading the nation in biofuels production. Landowners also directed their animosity towards Republican lawmakers who opposed the bill, namely at senators who failed to take up the issue for four years, then argued House File 639 was a bad bill. 'The fight for private property rights will continue,' Rasmussen, who was part of a group of landowners regularly lobbying at the State Capitol, said. 'Iowa legislators and Gov. Reynolds, we'll see you at the Capitol in 2026, and we can't wait to tell our legislators how we feel about their votes in the 2026 election.' Holt said the 'leadership void' from the governor and 'civil war' among Senate Republicans has exposed the difference between 'country club Republicans' and 'grassroots Republicans.' Rep. Charley Thomson, a Republican from Charles City who wrote the now-vetoed HF 639, and who, with Holt, has led much of the legislation on the issue, said the opposing Republicans are part of the 'anything-for-a-buck 'wing' of the party' and don't represent the 'vast majority' of Iowa Republicans. 'In the governor's view, constitutional rights, such as eminent domain protections, should not be allowed to interfere with schemes to make money, especially if those schemes are being promoted by her friends, supporters, and contributors,' Thomson wrote in a statement. Bruce Rastetter, founder of Summit Agricultural Group, which started Summit Carbon Solutions, has been a top campaign contributor to Reynolds' campaigns, sparking some of the criticism leveled at the governor. In her explanation of the veto decision, Reynolds wrote the bill had 'vague legal standards' and would impact projects beyond just the use of eminent domain. Reynolds cited the permit limits clause in the bill and increased requirements for insurance as setting a precedent that 'threatens' the state's business reputation. Senate President Amy Sinclair had the same beliefs on the bill. In a recent appearance on Iowa Press, Sinclair said HF 639 'was not a property owners rights bill' but rather a bill 'that's just going to facilitate activists.' 'To say I was a person who opposed property rights, that's 100% false,' Sinclair said on the show. Sinclair and other Republicans who were opposed to HF 639 voted for a re-write amendment to the bill, sponsored by Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny, that would have allowed companies to avoid eminent domain and instead pursue voluntary easements outside of the project corridor. It also would have held operators responsible for damage to the land for the project's lifetime. Thomson said Reynolds' stated concerns were a 'polite window-dressing' for the governor's 'real message' that she will 'veto any bill that Summit Carbon Solutions dislikes.' In reaction to the veto, Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, R-Wilton, vowed during a Radio Iowa interview to 'work to kill every single piece of legislation that has [Reynolds'] name on it.' The governor's office did not respond to a request for comment on the attacks from lawmakers. Summit Carbon Solutions, in a statement following the veto, said it looks forward to 'continued discussions with state leaders' as the project advances. Thomson and Holt said they are supportive of House Speaker Pat Grassley's call to petition for a special session in order to override the veto of the bill. The motion for a special session, and to override the veto, would require support from both chambers, which Senate majority leadership indicated Wednesday would be unlikely. Corey Cerwinske, a Bremer County Supervisor attending the virtual press conference, said lawmakers should introduce articles of impeachment on the governor for her 'malfeasance.' Holt said while the veto 'may violate' the constitutional rights of Iowans, the governor's action 'probably doesn't rise to the level of impeachment.' In her veto explanation, Reynolds asked the Iowa Utilities Commission to implement a section of the bill that required attendance at informational meetings and during live testimony. This was a problem brought up by landowners and lawmakers during the proceedings for the Summit Carbon Solutions permit. They alleged IUC would send representatives to meetings rather than commissioners, and that all three commissioners were not present during live testimony. The IUC in a Thursday press release said it 'fully supports' the 'transparency goals' the governor requested and 'will begin implementing' the practices. The release said the commission will also reinstate its public, monthly commission meetings beginning in August. 'The IUC remains dedicated to fair, transparent, and accountable governance of Iowa's energy and utility infrastructure,' the statement read. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Iowa governor vetoes bill restricting private pipelines' use of eminent domain
Gov. Kim Reynolds vetoed a bill Wednesday aimed at CO2 pipelines and eminent domain. She's pictured at her 2025 Condition of the State Address Jan. 14, 2025. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Gov. Kim Reynolds Wednesday vetoed a controversial bill pertaining to eminent domain and carbon sequestration pipelines in Iowa. House Republican leaders initiated an effort to reconvene the Legislature to override the veto, but Senate GOP leaders indicated that was unlikely. House File 639 would have increased insurance requirements for hazardous liquid pipelines, limited carbon pipeline permits to one 25-year term and changed the definition of a common carrier for pipelines, making it more difficult for the projects to use eminent domain. Reynolds, in a statement, said she shared the bill's goal of 'protecting landowners' but the bill lacked the 'clear, careful lines' drawn in good policy. 'It combines valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets,' Reynolds said in a letter announcing her decision to veto. Reynolds followed her critique of the bill by noting that Iowa could lose its 'leadership position' as a top biofuel production state if legislation stopped the infrastructure necessary to enter ultra-low carbon markets. Central to the bill is a carbon sequestration pipeline project led by Summit Carbon Solutions that would transport liquid carbon dioxide, captured from biorefineries across Iowa, to underground storage in North Dakota. Farmers and the biofuels industry have been supportive of the Summit pipeline, and therefore opposed to the bill, because it would give Iowa access to the carbon capture and sequestration technologies necessary to make products like sustainable aviation fuels. In a statement following the governor's veto, Iowa Renewable Fuels Association Executive Director Monte Shaw said without carbon capture projects, and entry to ultra-low carbon fuel industry, Iowa could face 'very real, very severe economic consequences.' 'This is a classic example of why our system of government has checks and balances,' Shaw said. 'Any thoughtful review of this bill would determine that it would lead to higher energy prices for Iowans, hamper future economic development, hold back job creation, and stifle new markets for Iowa farmers. IRFA thanks Gov. Reynolds for listening to Iowans, studying the actual legislation, and ignoring the rhetoric that was as inaccurate as it was loud.' A press release from Iowa Corn Growers Association said entrance to the aviation fuel industry alone could result in nearly 6.5 million bushels of new corn demand, which it said is necessary for farmers dealing with high input costs and decreased profit margins. Farmers 'need expanded market growth and access to continue raising corn profitably; allowing them to continue growing Iowa's agricultural industry and economy,' the statement said. Opponents of the bill, including several lawmakers, argued the bill was aimed solely at carbon sequestration projects, rather than protecting landowners from eminent domain as supporters claimed. 'Eminent domain' allows the government to force private landowners to allow use of their property, for a fee set by the courts, for infrastructure projects deemed in the public interest. Eminent domain has long been used projects such as public roads and utilities. Leadership from Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy, or SIRE, said its CO2 pipeline project connecting to Nebraska's Tallgrass Trailblazer pipeline would be impacted by the bill's insurance and permit limit clauses, even though the SIRE project secured voluntary easements for 100% of its path in Iowa. Reynolds cited this example in her explanation, and said the 'arbitrary' term limits and insurance requirements would make it 'difficult for companies like SIRE to justify the additional investment' in Iowa. 'Those who crafted the bill said they don't want to stop CO2 pipelines that rely entirely on voluntary easements,' Reynolds said. 'But that is exactly what the bill does.' Summit Carbon Solutions thanked the governor for her 'thoughtful and thorough review' of the bill. In a statement, the company said the pipeline project 'opens the door to new markets and helps strengthen America's energy dominance for the long term.' 'Summit remains committed to working with landowners through voluntary agreements—just as we have with more than 1,300 Iowa landowners to date, resulting in $175 million in payments,' a spokesperson said in the statement. 'We look forward to continued discussions with state leaders as we advance this important project.' Opponents to the pipeline project, who were supportive of HF 639, argue the pipeline would negatively impact their properties and health, and that sequestering CO2 does not constitute a 'public use' deserving of eminent domain rights. Landowners opposed to the project lobbied state lawmakers for four years before a bill was debated, and ultimately passed, in the Senate and sent to the governor. Since the bill landed on the governor's desk, landowners have encouraged Reynolds to support Iowa GOP values on protecting property rights. Reynolds said the debate of when the government, or companies with government approval, can take private property is a 'debate as old as the Republic.' 'I've consistently said that if eminent domain is used, it must be rare, fair and a last resort,' Reynolds said. 'But HF 639 isn't just about eminent domain.' Reynolds said the bill sets a precedent that 'threatens' the state's 'energy reliability, economy and reputation as a place where businesses can invest with confidence.' Mary Powell, a Shelby County landowner opposed to the pipeline, said the veto shows that the state motto of, 'Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain' are 'just empty words' to the governor. 'Governor Reynolds chose to support the millionaires and billionaires at the expense of Iowans and their property rights,' Powell said in a statement. Another landowner, Don Johanssen from Cherokee County, said the governor's decision was 'beyond words,' especially as the bill would have given landowners 'some liability coverage' from hazardous pipelines. The bill would have required pipeline operator to carry insurance that covered any loss or injury from accidental, negligent or intentional discharges from the pipeline, and to cover insurance increases that landowners face due to the pipeline. 'This is a sad day for Iowa that will be long remembered,' Johanssen said. Reynolds said the bill would impact 'more than just CO2 infrastructure' and would change permitting rules 'across the board,' giving 'uncertainty into critical energy projects.' Opponents of the bill called the insurance requirements 'untenable.' The American Petroleum Institute's Midwest Regional Director Mike Karbo said the bill had 'unprecedented and unfeasible requirements' that would have hindered future projects in the state. 'Since there are no refineries in the state, critical energy infrastructure, such as pipelines, are crucial in ensuring Iowans have a reliable source of energy, and certainty is needed to develop the infrastructure network,' Karbo said. 'We thank the Governor for doing what is right for the future of energy development in the state.' Reynolds said HF 639 included 'a few helpful provisions' and the surrounding debate 'highlighted' areas for progress. 'I agree we can do more to limit the use of eminent domain, promote transparency, and ensure responsible land restoration,' Reynolds said. 'We can do better.' Reynolds, who is not running for reelection in 2026, said she is 'committed' to working with legislation to 'strengthen landowner protections, modernize permitting and respect private property.' Taking one element from HF 639, Reynolds will ask the IUC to require all commissioners to be present for live testimony and ensure at least one commissioner is present at every informational meeting. In a statement from Iowa House Republicans, Speaker Pat Grassley said he has requested members sign a petition to reconvene the Legislature in a special session. 'This veto is a major setback for Iowa,' Grassley said in the statement. 'It is a setback not only for landowners who have been fighting across Iowa, but for the work the House of Representatives has put in for four years to get legislation like HF 639 passed. We will not stop fighting and stand firm on our commitment until landowners' in Iowa are protected against Eminent Domain for private gain.' Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, said he was 'very disappointed' in the governor's decision and that he was supportive of a special session to override the veto. Two-thirds of the Legislature must sign a petition to request a special session, and to override a veto, two-thirds of the members from each chamber must vote to pass the bill again. Sen. Jack Whitver, R-Grimes, the majority leader for the chamber, said he expects most of his caucus will 'not be interested in any attempt' to override the governor's veto. The bill likely would not have advanced in the Senate had it not been for a dozen Republican senators who vowed to block necessary budget legislation until the chamber debated eminent domain. The 12 were also joined by Senate Democrats in pushing for amendments, which were ultimately defeated, and approval of the bill. Senate Democrats said the fight for property rights will continue. 'I'm disappointed by the governor's veto of HF639, but, unfortunately, I cannot say I'm surprised,' Sen. Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, said. 'There is simply no amount of political posturing or legislative stonewalling that can deny the fact that Iowans' right to private property should never be infringed upon for private gain.' One of the 12 to disagree with the Senate majority, Sen. Kevin Alons, R-Salix, said signing the bill was 'the single option available' to protect the rights of impacted landowners. Alons pledged to 'never quit working' on the issue, but said that means 'very little' to landowners who have been impacted by the 'unprecedented, and unconstitutional land grab.' 'To be clear: the Iowa government has given this private company the right to take people's land for one reason: corporate earnings,' Alons said in a statement. 'This has nothing to do with public use. It's absolutely not necessary for the ethanol industry in our state … And it certainly is not what the founders had in mind.' Alons said when the Legislature returns in January, he and other lawmakers 'will use every tool at our disposal' to 'return property rights back to the people.' Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, who sponsored the legislation, wrote in a social media post he was 'profoundly disappointed' by the veto. Holt said the state constitution and the Republican platform are clear in their message that eminent domain is for public use projects. 'Today the Governor has chosen to ignore landowners, the vast majority of the Legislature, the Republican Party Platform and the Iowa Constitution by choosing the economic development argument of special interests,' Holt wrote. Holt said Reynolds, and the Senate had opportunities of the past several years to offer their own suggestions to the eminent domain issue instead of opposing House legislation. 'On behalf of the people of Iowa and their fundamental property rights, the Governor's veto should be overridden,' he wrote. 'This fight for who we are as Republicans is far from over.' House Democratic Leader Rep. Brian Meyer said parties in the House collaborated to 'protect property rights.' 'At the end of the day, there is only one group to blame for the failure of the eminent domain bill: Iowa Republican lawmakers,' Meyer said in a statement. The first phase of the Summit Carbon Solutions project was approved by IUC nearly a year ago, which granted Summit the right to condemn easements from landowners who do not want to voluntarily sign agreements to put the pipeline on their land. Per the Iowa permit, Summit still needs a permit from South Dakota, which it has been denied twice, to begin construction. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
