“Remove Them in 60 Days”: Haverhill Cracks Down on Crypto ATMs

Crypto ATMs are facing increasing pressure in the United States, with Haverhill, Massachusetts, moving to enforce a full ban and a 60-day removal order. City officials are taking action despite the growing popularity of these machines, which once promised easier access to digital assets. So, what changed?

Haverhill Pushes For Full Ban

Haverhill’s City Council is advancing an ordinance that would prohibit all cryptocurrency ATMs within city limits. The proposal, introduced on March 17 by Mayor Melinda E. Barrett, already secured unanimous support in its initial vote.

If enacted, operators must remove all machines within 60 days or face a $300 daily fine per machine. The measure aims to address what city leaders describe as growing risks tied to these kiosks.

Officials pointed to financial fraud, money laundering concerns, and a lack of user protection. Without strong federal or state oversight, local authorities are stepping in. 

Fraud Cases Drive Urgency

Authorities say crypto ATMs have become a tool for scammers, particularly targeting vulnerable users. Many victims reportedly lack recourse after transactions, which are often irreversible.

One case highlighted how a scammer impersonated a business owner and tricked employees into sending funds through a crypto ATM, resulting in losses exceeding $11,000. Incidents like this have fueled calls for stricter rules.

Other cities have already taken action. South Hadley, Waltham, and Gloucester have implemented similar bans, while New Hampshire introduced legislation to reimburse victims who report fraud within 14 days.

These developments show a clear trend. Local governments are no longer waiting. They are acting quickly to contain what they see as a growing threat.

Bitcoin Depot Faces Growing Pressure

As the largest crypto ATM operator, Bitcoin Depot has drawn significant scrutiny. High transaction volumes have made its machines a frequent target in fraud cases.

Regulators have already taken action. In Massachusetts, Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell filed a lawsuit alleging that scammers used the company’s ATMs to defraud residents. Other states, including Connecticut and Iowa, have also moved against the firm.

At the same time, the company faces internal changes. Former CEO Scott Buchanan stepped down, and Alex Holmes took over leadership. Despite a recent short-term stock increase, the company’s shares have dropped sharply over the past six months.

This situation highlights a broader issue. Can major operators adapt quickly enough to rising regulatory pressure?

A Turning Point For Crypto Accessibility?

Crypto ATMs were designed to simplify access to digital currencies. They allowed users to buy and sell crypto without complex online platforms. For many, they served as an entry point into the crypto ecosystem.

Now, that narrative is shifting. Concerns about fraud and misuse are reshaping how regulators view these machines. Instead of enabling adoption, they are increasingly seen as risk points.

At the same time, policymakers continue to debate how to balance innovation with consumer protection. Should stricter regulations replace outright bans? Or do these risks justify removing the machines entirely?

For now, Haverhill’s proposal reflects a decisive stance. As more cities consider similar measures, the future of crypto ATMs in the U.S. remains uncertain. Now the conversation has moved beyond convenience. It is now about trust, safety, and accountability in a rapidly evolving financial landscape.