In February, I wrote that Assembly Member Timothy S. Grayson was taking another run at enacting a Digital Financial Asset Law.  His bill, AB 39, has steadily progressed and is now pending in the Senate.  According to the bill's digest, the bill will "on and after January 1, 2025, prohibit a person from engaging in digital financial asset business activity, or holding itself out as being able to engage in digital financial asset business activity, with or on behalf of a resident unless any of certain criteria are met, including the person is licensed with the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, as prescribed". 

In July, the author amended the bill to authorize the DFPI to take enforcement action against a person who is not a licensee but has engaged, is engaging, or is about to engage in digital financial asset business activity.  This, of course, raises the question of how close a person must be to engaging in financial asset business activity to be "about to engage".    It seems to me that "about to engage" is a more nebulous standard than the "attempt to engage" standard in criminal law which generally requires intention, an act, and non-completion.