Fidelity Digital Asset Services has agreed to pay $500,000 to settle a case with California over past limits on customers’ ability to withdraw certain cryptocurrencies.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the settlement on Friday, October 16, 2026, on X, saying the case addresses restrictions that affected investors’ access to the digital assets they had bought.
“While the cryptocurrency market may be ever changing and shifting, California law does not,” he wrote. He added, “Investors have a right to access to what they buy.”
The settlement involves Fidelity Digital Asset Services, the cryptocurrency arm of Fidelity Investments. However, the state has not yet explained which cryptocurrencies were affected, how many customers faced the restrictions or whether individual customers will receive any further relief.
The Crypto Times has reached out to Fidelity Digital Asset Services for comment on the settlement and the withdrawal restrictions at the center of the case.
Why California took action against Fidelity
The case brings attention to an important issue for people who buy cryptocurrency: being able to withdraw their assets when they want to. Buying crypto is one part of investing, but moving it out of a trading account is another.
Customers may want to transfer their coins to a personal wallet or another platform. When a company places limits on withdrawals, customers may find it harder to move their assets as they wish.
Fidelity’s current rules allow customers to transfer supported cryptocurrencies from their Fidelity Crypto accounts, although some limits apply. According to the company’s help materials, its standard daily withdrawal limit is $2,000. Customers can request an advanced limit of up to $25,000 per day.
The company supports Bitcoin, Ethereum, FIDD, Litecoin and Solana on certain blockchain networks, depending on availability in each customer’s state.
The firm also says customers must also have enough crypto available for withdrawal before making a transfer. Scheduled maintenance, network conditions and account restrictions can affect access. Fidelity states that accounts restricted from making deposits or withdrawals cannot transfer crypto or manage withdrawal addresses.
However, the available information does not confirm whether these current rules are the same restrictions involved in the California case.
Robinhood faced a similar California case
Meanwhile, Fidelity is not the first major crypto platform that the state has taken action against. In September 2024, Bonta announced a $3.9 million settlement with Robinhood Crypto over its handling of customer withdrawals between 2018 and 2022.
The state said the company had failed to allow customers to withdraw cryptocurrency and had not fully disclosed parts of its trading and order-handling arrangements. The deal included a financial penalty and requirements for the company’s conduct.
Other regulators have targeted crypto platforms
Other authorities have also acted against crypto companies. New York’s attorney general secured restrictions on KuCoin’s services for existing customers in the state, limiting them to withdrawals.
The Federal Trade Commission also reached a proposed settlement with Celsius Network that would stop the company and its affiliates from handling consumer assets. These cases show that regulators are paying attention to how crypto platforms manage customers’ money and digital assets.
California’s Digital Financial Assets Law also sets rules aimed at protecting residents who use digital asset services, with requirements tied to July 1, 2026. Fidelity’s settlement adds to the state’s efforts to hold crypto companies accountable under its laws.
For now, important details about the affected customers and cryptocurrencies remain unknown.
Also Read: Lummis Criticizes Democrats For Voting Against Clarity Act
