Other states are testing parallel currencies, but legal, political and fiscal roadblocks make the idea nearly impossible in the Golden State.
Imagine walking into your local coffee shop in Los Angeles and paying for your latte with a gold coin or a sliver of silver. It may sound far-fetched, but across the country, several states are moving legislation that edges closer to this very idea: recognizing gold and silver as legal tender alongside the U.S. dollar.
Utah was the first to act in 2011, and more recently, Texas, Missouri and Oklahoma have introduced or passed similar measures. These efforts are fueled by rising distrust in fiat currency, frustration with federal debt and persistent inflation. They reflect a broader unease: Americans are questioning whether the dollar, untethered from gold since 1971, can hold its value in a world of mounting deficits and political dysfunction.
But what about California?
The first and biggest barrier is constitutional. Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress exclusive authority to coin money and regulate its value. Article I, Section 10 goes further, prohibiting states from making “any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.” That second clause often confuses people. It reads as if states must use gold and silver. In practice, courts have consistently interpreted it to mean that states cannot create their own forms of currency and must adhere to federal monetary policy.
The “Legal Tender Cases” of the late 19th century cemented this interpretation. The Supreme Court held that Congress alone has the power to determine what qualifies as legal tender, and the federal government’s designation of the dollar as sole legal currency trumps state efforts. Even when states pass gold and silver tender bills, they function more as political statements than as enforceable law.
That is why, even in Utah or Texas, you won’t see checkout lines where cashiers are weighing coins. The reality is symbolic recognition without practical application.
If any state has the economic heft to challenge the dollar, it is California. With the world’s fifth-largest economy, California has global influence. Yet politically, the state is unlikely to lead on this issue.
First, California’s budgetary obligations are all denominated in U.S. dollars. Switching even partially to metals would require recalculating obligations, disrupting contracts and potentially triggering a constitutional showdown with Washington.
Second, California’s political leadership tends to align with federal policy. While Texas champions independence from Washington, Sacramento has historically embraced national monetary and regulatory frameworks. The idea of California openly signaling distrust in the dollar runs against its political culture.
Finally, bureaucratic inertia is a force of its own. The complexity of introducing a parallel currency system from tax collection to debt servicing is overwhelming. For a state already grappling with deficits and sprawling obligations, the appetite for a disruptive experiment is vanishingly small.
This reality did not stop confusion last year when some outlets mistakenly reported that California had passed a law to make gold and silver legal tender. In fact, Senate Bill 704 did nothing of the kind. SB 704 simply exempted certain bulk sales of precious metals from taxation. It was a technical bill about sales tax, not a monetary revolution.
The episode illustrates how much public interest exists in this conversation and how easily excitement outpaces reality.
Even if the political will were present, the business case falters on logistics. Gold and silver prices fluctuate minute by minute. Merchants would need real-time pricing systems, training in assaying and new tax protocols. Imagine a gas station changing its price board not once a day, but dozens of times to keep pace with metal markets.
For consumers, the learning curve would be equally steep. Would they carry scales? Would every transaction be rounded to the nearest fraction of an ounce? For small businesses already struggling with costs, this would be unworkable.
That is why, even in states that have passed such measures, precious metals circulate as investments and hedges, not as pocket change. People buy them for long-term preservation of wealth, not for groceries.
What state legal-tender bills accomplish is largely symbolic. They send a message of dissatisfaction with Washington’s fiscal policies and a desire to return to tangible assets as the basis of value. They also stimulate local debate about the dollar’s trajectory and the role of gold and silver in protecting wealth.
But symbolism does not equate to sustainability. The U.S. dollar remains the world’s reserve currency, backed not only by federal law but by international markets. Unless Congress itself redefines money, gold and silver will remain supplemental rather than central.
California residents already act on their distrust of the dollar, but not through Sacramento. They buy metals privately, store them as a hedge and treat them as insurance against volatility. California’s demand for precious metals is among the highest in the country.
This consumer behavior speaks louder than hypothetical legislation. Californians are effectively creating their own “parallel system,” but it is one rooted in personal portfolios, not state coffers.
So, will gold and silver ever become California’s legal tender? The constitutional, political, and logistical obstacles make it highly unlikely. Californians will continue to “vote with their wallets,” turning to precious metals not as daily spending money but as protection against the uncertainties of debt, inflation, and federal policy.
The desire is real. The demand is real. But the barriers from Washington’s legal authority to Sacramento’s fiscal obligations are higher than the Sierra Nevadas. Until those barriers fall, your latte in Los Angeles will remain $7, not seven grams of gold.
Jack Hanney is the chief executive and founder of Patriot Gold Group and has more than 20 years of experience in financial markets and precious metals investing.
