Four principles
Everything below follows from these.
- Every figure traces to a primary source. A statute, a public register, a regulator's publication, a government dataset, or an operator's own published terms. If we cannot point at one, we do not publish the number.
- Commercial relationships are disclosed and do not buy position. Partnerships pay for a link, not for a ranking, and never for the removal of a criticism.
- Uncertainty is stated, not smoothed over. Several aspects of the Illinois Digital Asset Tax Act are genuinely unsettled and under litigation. We say so rather than manufacturing a confident answer.
- The expensive option is named as expensive. Illinois kiosks are legal, regulated and useful to some people. They are also the costliest route in the state, and we say that on every page they appear on — including pages that carry commercial links.
How we are funded
Plainly: some outbound links on this site are commercial partnerships that may earn us a commission if you open an account, at no additional cost to you.
The most visible is CEX.IO CORP, which appears as the featured on-ramp in the hero section of most pages. We disclose that relationship in the footer of every page and in the disclosure box on our exchange rankings.
What that relationship does and does not affect:
What a commercial relationship changes
| Does affect | Does not affect |
|---|---|
| Which provider is featured in call-to-action placements | Position in our ranked comparisons |
| That we link to them rather than only naming them | Whether criticisms are published |
| Whether the site is financially viable at all | The factual description of fees, licensing or terms |
| — | Whether we recommend a cheaper alternative when one exists |
The test we apply, and that you can apply to us: does the page still tell you the cheapest route, even when the cheapest route is not the one paying? On this site the recommended route is repeatedly "a licensed exchange funded by ACH bank transfer, using a limit order", and the routes we describe as expensive include ones we carry links to.
One thing we do not do
We do not sell placement in rankings, sponsored reviews presented as editorial, or the removal of criticism. Enquiries of that kind are declined, and it is the most common reason we decline a partnership.
How rankings are decided
Our exchange comparison ranks on four criteria, in this order of weight.
Marketing spend, brand recognition and commission rates are not criteria. Where a venue we have a commercial relationship with has a genuine weakness, it is published — for example, that staking and savings products are unavailable to US customers, and that instant-buy flows cost more than the spot order book.
Sourcing standards
What counts as a source here, in descending order of preference.
- Statutory text and public act numbers. SB 1797, SB 2319, Public Act 104-0468, 205 ILCS 731, 205 ILCS 658, 815 ILCS 505/2SS.
- Government datasets. The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center for fraud figures; NMLS Consumer Access and FinCEN's MSB registrant search for licensing.
- Regulator publications. IDFPR guidance and fact sheets; Illinois Attorney General consumer alerts.
- Operator disclosures. Published fee schedules, terms and conditions, and company filings.
- Reputable secondary reporting where primary material is not public — legal-industry analysis, established trade press, and third-party market surveys, identified as such.
Labelling. Where a figure is illustrative rather than quoted — the "what a $500 purchase costs" tables, for instance — the page says so directly beneath it. Where market data is known to lag reality, such as kiosk directory counts, we say that too.
What we do not use. Affiliate-network marketing copy, unattributed statistics, screenshots of profits, and any claim that traces only to another content site.
What we refuse to publish
- Price predictions. Nobody can make them reliably and publishing them would be dishonest.
- Investment recommendations. We are not an investment adviser and do not hold ourselves out as one.
- Guaranteed-return claims of any kind, including repeating a provider's.
- Sponsored content presented as editorial.
- Links to unlicensed platforms we cannot verify on a public register.
- Anything promoting trading signal services, "mentors" or recruitment structures. Those are the front end of the fraud category described in our scam guide.
- Recovery services. We will not carry them under any circumstances. The Illinois Attorney General has warned about them specifically and they target people already defrauded once.
Corrections
This is the part we would most like readers to use.
Every page carries a review date. Illinois has passed three digital asset statutes in twelve months, two lawsuits are pending, operator fee schedules move without notice, and kiosk directories are frequently months out of date. Some of what is on this site will go stale.
To report an error: email contact@crypto-illinois.com with CORRECTION at the start of the subject line, the page URL, and — if you have it — a link to the current source. We check against primary material and update the page.
We are especially interested in things we cannot see from a desk: a kiosk charging above the statutory cap, a machine listed in a directory that no longer exists, an operator refusing to engage with a refund claim, or local coverage that has changed.
Material corrections update the page and the review date. We do not quietly delete errors.
On AI, authorship and expertise
A question worth answering directly, given how much of the crypto web is now generated at scale.
Every page on this site is edited by people, and every factual claim is checked against a primary source before publication. Where we describe a first-hand observation — the "from our review desk" boxes — it reflects work actually done comparing operator terms, kiosk pricing and licensing records across Illinois, not an invented anecdote or a fabricated named author.
We deliberately do not publish invented author biographies or fictional expert credentials. That practice is widespread in this sector and it is a form of dishonesty. Where expertise matters — tax, law, estate planning, security clearances, military residency — we say plainly that the question belongs with a qualified professional rather than pretending to hold a credential we do not.
The standard we hold ourselves to
If a reader followed every recommendation on this site exactly, they would end up with a licensed account they verified themselves, a small position sized to survive a 70% drawdown, holdings in a wallet they control, records adequate for a tax return, and an accurate understanding of what Illinois law does and does not protect. That is the outcome we optimise for.
Crypto Illinois is an independent editorial website. It is not a bank, broker-dealer, money transmitter, investment adviser or tax adviser, and it is not affiliated with any Illinois or federal government body. Nothing on this site is financial, investment, legal or tax advice.
Questions Illinois readers actually ask
Are your rankings paid for?
No. Some outbound links are commercial partnerships that may pay a commission at no additional cost to you, and we disclose that on every page carrying one. Position in a ranking is determined by verifiable licensing, real all-in cost, withdrawal quality and operating history. Criticisms of partner services stay in — you will find them on this site.
How often do you update pages?
Every page carries a review date. We revisit the law and tax pages whenever a statute changes or litigation moves, the fee and kiosk pages when operator terms change, and the city guides at least annually. Illinois has passed three digital asset statutes in twelve months, so the review cycle here is faster than most sites need.
What do you do if you get something wrong?
Correct it. Email contact@crypto-illinois.com with the page and, if possible, the current source. Material corrections are made to the page and the review date updated. We would rather be corrected than defend something that has moved.
Keep reading