Everything you wanted to know about Bitcoin Strategic Reserve

[PremiumcryptoHub]

It's interesting to notice that El Salvador sped up their Bitcoin buying after the IMF granted them a few extra funds:




On Dec 20 and Dec 22, they bought 11 BTC in addition to the usual 1 BTC daily.

I don't know if they will keep buying these additional 11 BTC, but surely it is trolling at its best.

El Salvador bought 11 bitcoins again yesterday. We saw on Twitter that El Salvador bought 11 Bitcoins on December 20th and December 22nd which means they bought 11 Bitcoins three times in total. After the US government sold their seized bitcoins, the price of bitcoins fell, at the moment the price of bitcoins is still lower. Perhaps El Salvador took the opportunity to buy more bitcoins with the opportunity of a market dip. Their total Bitcoin holdings at the moment are 6,023.
New Hampshire recently introduced a bill to create a bitcoin reserve.

[dezoel]

CBDC is definitely the way they are planning to go with, and having CBDC backed by the bitcoin holding they have, could cause them to have their cake and eat it too. That will allow them to raise more capital, and they could even use it as asset to get more debt as well.

This is why I never trust governments and I am sure they will figure out a way to make this bad as well, not sure how they will turn this to be a bad thing, because bitcoin is great and I love bitcoin and I would love it if any nation ends up buying bitcoin for a reserve, but even though the news itself sounds great, I am still fearing what it may cause in the future. Like I said, I have no idea how this could hurt us, can't see or predict it yet, and yes it looks great so far, but just because I have no idea how this will turn around and bite us in the a--, doesn't mean that I do not think it won't happen, I am sure that it will happen, I just don't know when and how.

[JayJuanGee]

But as DB states, it would have been at least inconvenient if the current administration sold such a large chunk of the government holdings just weeks before Trump's inauguration.

Isn't there a claim of ownership by the agency that confiscated the money? I'm not sure how much of this applies to this case:

The FAIR Act would:
   Eliminate “Equitable” Sharing: The “equitable” sharing program allows state law enforcement officers to turn seized property over to federal officials for forfeiture — and get up to 80% of the proceeds of the forfeited property. The FAIR Act ends “equitable” sharing and ensures that law enforcement cannot ignore state law.

I can imagine some agency doesn't want to hand over those Bitcoins to the Trump administration, if they can claim a large part of it for themselves. But again: I don't know if this applies to this case.

For sure, there can be quite a bit of devil in various details, and sometimes, if a leader describes how things are going to get done, they might be missing some of the nuance in regards to various obstacles, such as actual ownership, disputes about ownership or even how due process might play out whether there are civil claims over the coins or criminal claims, and public entities tend to have responsibilities and requirements, even if some strong leader (or strong leader wannabe) comes in and strives to streamline various public processes that even continue to exist in the USA and are going to be giving Trump push back on several of the things that he says that he is going to do or that he is wanting to do.

There have also been a lot of complaints in regards to USA executives (referring to the presidency) gaining more and more power, and some of the recent supreme court rulings seem to also had ruled in a direction that Trump will probably work towards exploiting, not like he is the kind of guy who like boundaries, which probably was part of the reason that he was elected since some of the boundaries of the other side were seeming to have their own freedom impinging inclinations.

[edited out]

I guess that agencies ARE the Trump administration, and if they are ordered to hand over the seized funds to a "Bitcoin Strategic Reserve agency", they have little to do against it.
I am unfamiliar with that part of the legislation, but the agencies don't "own" the bitcoins. Otherwise, they wouldn't need a judge to authorise them to sell the funds trough the US Marshalls.

I am not going to claim to be an expert in regards to the authority that the president has in connection with each of the agencies, since there are various kinds of agencies, and some of them are more subjected to executive orders and whims and others are not, so it is not automatic that presidents can do whatever they like, even if there is an executive agency involved in the process, and surely which agency holds the coins can make differences in regards to the process involved, and perhaps if the BTC were already held by the US treasury, then that would be different than if they are held by the department of justice or the US Marshalls, and even if there is a process in place for how to deal with various kinds of property, property rights are frequently described by states rather than the federal government, so there could be differences in regards to how the coins were seized in the first place and if there might be some state property issues involved, and of course, courts will rule on various disputes about property rights too, which they could be overruled...

oh yeah and sometimes there could be interagency courts that have to be exhausted prior to those inter-agencies being subject to appeal in federal courts, and yeah there sometimes could be ways that processes are skipped, so it is not always going to be clear about which coins are disputed and where they are disputed and what have been the past rulings and are those ruling subject to appeal (or cancelation of the process in the case of some kinds of things that executives might be able to do), and sometimes if there might be a change in the rule about how an agency treats property, there might be a need to propose such rule in the federal registry, which allows for a public comment period, and sure agencies will sometimes try to skirt those kinds of requirements, which is one of the ways that the SEC had been criticized recently in regards to it making up its own rules but not going through public processes.

[fillippone]

CBDC is definitely the way they are planning to go with, and having CBDC backed by the bitcoin holding they have, could cause them to have their cake and eat it too. Th

Trump said many times that the US will never have a CBDC.
Of course, it's only a politician's promise, but it's an easy one to maintain.
In case he set up a CBDC or hints so, there will probably be an unwind on more difficult ones, like the institution of a BSR.
 

[JayJuanGee]

CBDC is definitely the way they are planning to go with, and having CBDC backed by the bitcoin holding they have, could cause them to have their cake and eat it too. Th

Trump said many times that the US will never have a CBDC.
Of course, it's only a politician's promise, but it's an easy one to maintain.
In case he set up a CBDC or hints so, there will probably be an unwind on more difficult ones, like the institution of a BSR.

Trump is not the ONLY one calling the shots, and sure maybe he (or some of the folks in his sphere making decisions and creating priorities) might be able to strike various proper balances, yet even with various government behaviors to co-opt various stable coins (even USDT), there can develop more and more ways in which those fuck twats are spying on, controlling and even limiting transactability.. so in that sense, dezoel is correct to be skeptical, even though he was a bit lame in terms of how lacking he was in the backing up of his skepticisms.

I think that we have to continue to attempt to be vigilant in regards to whatever various politicians do and what some of their actions (even when they are claiming their actions to be a good thing), especially since Trump and some of the other diptwats such as Elon, talk out of both sides of their mouth and they don't exactly have very good track records in regards to their own conduct - various  ways that Trump has used and abused debt and failed refused to follow laws based on his own selfishness, greed and gangster mentality, and Elon seems to never have had seen a government subsidy that he doesn't like, including his being a bit childish in his own behaviors whether in relation to Doggie coin or some of his other time motivations to appear as if he is the smartest one in the room (which might or might not even be true).

By the way, it could be helpful that a couple of Trump's kids seem to be helping to guide some of the understandings in regards to how bitcoin differs from shitcoins, we might still need to question the extent to which some compromises might end up coming in regards to how bitcoin might balance out with various shitcoins, stable coins, meme coins and including if there might be some CBDC type elements that are getting included in the various ways that we are able to interact or if there  are going to be allowed to be developments of privacy and direct transactions without having a bunch of traceable elements (and backdoors) that are difficult for many of us to figure out the various ways that our financial privacy and self-sovereignty is being compromised.  I am probably rambling too since I don't claim to really know how various backdoors are created and/or that we are able to operate without having to be overly surveilled and potentially controlled at some later date because of our transaction history that we might not have realized was present or maybe even in some circumstances the information about our transaction history is not even correct, but the surveillance tools are still being used to lock up normies in selective ways that can sometimes be difficult to figure out... .yeah, let out Ross is a good sign.. maybe drop the tornado cash case.. .. perhaps drop the Samarai case too.. perhaps incentivize phoenix to come back to the USA.. and other developers who have become worried about various levels of draconianism.. perhaps allow some of the earlier closed banks to open back up.. since they were clearly targeted based on their "crypto system".. perhaps intervene to make sure that Caitlin Long gets a banking license.. .. I don't know about everything, but there could be some steps that provide assurances that back doors are not as likely to happen in the coming 4 years.. and maybe even setting up systems that give assurance that it can last beyond 4 years. ..

[Frankolala]

It is now a competition in the US as states are introducing bills that will allow them invest in bitcoin with state funds. Every government in states and some countries have seen bitcoin to be a good asset and have chosen to use it as their reserve. This meana that if it continues like this and many countries have bitcoin reserve, the price will be very expensive and the poor hodlers can transform their future with their bitcoin investment.

[JiiBs]

CBDC is definitely the way they are planning to go with, and having CBDC backed by the bitcoin holding they have, could cause them to have their cake and eat it too. Th

Trump said many times that the US will never have a CBDC.
Of course, it's only a politician's promise, but it's an easy one to maintain.
In case he set up a CBDC or hints so, there will probably be an unwind on more difficult ones, like the institution of a BSR.

The part Trump has played in his presidency has always given people a reason to see him for his words most times than others. Especially for Bitcoin investors given his outspokenness for the currency/industry. It would almost make anyone believe that, he would stick by a NO CBDC course but, I don’t see how he would fight his own currency and replace it with what?

There is where I would have to believe that all it takes for politicians is to undo a statement in the past with another statement.

Trump is not the ONLY one calling the shots, and sure maybe he (or some of the folks in his sphere making decisions and creating priorities) might be able to strike various proper balances, yet even with various government behaviors to co-opt various stable coins (even USDT), there can develop more and more ways in which those fuck twats are spying on, controlling and even limiting transactability.. so in that sense, dezoel is correct to be skeptical, even though he was a bit lame in terms of how lacking he was in the backing up of his skepticisms.

He obviously can’t afford to be a dictator, that’s not happening in the US no.

[AirtelBuzz]

Every government in states and some countries have seen bitcoin to be a good asset and have chosen to use it as their reserve. This meana that if it continues like this and many countries have bitcoin reserve, the price will be very expensive and the poor hodlers can transform their future with their bitcoin investment.

Some states, some countries, and some public companies are currently opting for Bitcoin as a strategic reserve. Those companies are accepting payments through Bitcoin. Maybe this news will help to have a positive impact on the Bitcoin market. We have seen that there are many public companies in the world who are already investing in Bitcoin, among them are Microstrategy, Riot, Hut8 and many others. Currently another public company Heritage Distilling has adopted bitcoin reserves.

[Olatundespo]

Every government in states and some countries have seen bitcoin to be a good asset and have chosen to use it as their reserve. This meana that if it continues like this and many countries have bitcoin reserve, the price will be very expensive and the poor hodlers can transform their future with their bitcoin investment.

Some states, some countries, and some public companies are currently opting for Bitcoin as a strategic reserve. Those companies are accepting payments through Bitcoin. Maybe this news will help to have a positive impact on the Bitcoin market. We have seen that there are many public companies in the world who are already investing in Bitcoin, among them are Microstrategy, Riot, Hut8 and many others. Currently another public company Heritage Distilling has adopted bitcoin reserves.

You're right. North Dakota Senators and Representatives have introduced a bill to invest state funds in Bitcoin. If approved, it would add another colorful feather to Bitcoin's throne.
The tempting reality of Bitcoin investing is more positive.



https://x.com/BitcoinMagazine/status/1877838722969784345

[fillippone]

I am not sure of the freedom of each State to create its own Bitcoin Reserve.
It would be nice to see the 50 States voting on similar bills, just trying to front-run the Federal Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.
I guess, ultimately, a sort of coordination might be necessary.

[LoyceV]

It would be nice to see the 50 States voting on similar bills, just trying to front-run the Federal Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.

If that many States create a Bitcoin storage, what are the odds that one of them is going to get their coins stolen?

[fillippone]

It would be nice to see the 50 States voting on similar bills, just trying to front-run the Federal Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.

If that many States create a Bitcoin storage, what are the odds that one of them is going to get their coins stolen?

I hope it’s very low.
I guess in the US the use of Coinbase is very prominent, and it offers a decent level of security for the organisation are not able to do self-custody.
Of course in case some of the state would embark in self custody the chance would skyrocket to very high!

[Fiatless]

I am not sure of the freedom of each State to create its own Bitcoin Reserve.
It would be nice to see the 50 States voting on similar bills, just trying to front-run the Federal Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.
I guess, ultimately, a sort of coordination might be necessary.

Since some lawmakers of various State Houses of Representatives are proposing the establishment of a strategic Bitcoin reserve, it could be that it is the state legislative house has the power to make such laws. Just like there are different state laws on marijuana, abortion, etc., some Legislative House might vote against having a Bitcoin reserve. The possibility of all the states forming a single front on this issue might not be visible since they might not have similar laws.

[franky1]

CBDC is definitely the way they are planning to go with, and having CBDC backed by the bitcoin holding they have, could cause them to have their cake and eat it too. Th

Trump said many times that the US will never have a CBDC.
Of course, it's only a politician's promise, but it's an easy one to maintain.
In case he set up a CBDC or hints so, there will probably be an unwind on more difficult ones, like the institution of a BSR.
 

NEVER?
trumps promise?
...... and what about after 2028
politicians promises come with a time limit, all they can do is delay things until they are no longer in power to be blamed

[fillippone]

NEVER?
trumps promise?

Don’t get me started on politician promises.
I know the aren’t to be trusted, and also I know bitcoin doesn’t need heroes.
The only thing I was trying to convey is that Trump dismissing his own promises is not the central scenario this time.
Like I haven’t been surprised (on the downside) many times.

[franky1]

NEVER?
trumps promise?

Don’t get me started on politician promises.
I know the aren’t to be trusted, and also I know bitcoin doesn’t need heroes.
The only thing I was trying to convey is that Trump dismissing his own promises is not the central scenario this time.
Like I haven’t been surprised (on the downside) many times.

doesnt need heroes?
how come many people are faming up trump as the bitcoin reserve hero
even though many central banks across the planet, including the US have been discussing regulation and oversight of such for a few years (within the BIS organisation) pre-trump

..
anyways the ETF's didnt break bitcoins economic logic, nor the cycles pattern.. so lets not make bitcoin reserves into some market hero/villain.. most of those institutional deals wont even be done directly on CEX public markets

[fillippone]

doesnt need heroes?

It does not.
It’s easy to put some hero on the throne, and it’s certain that sooner or later that hero will fall from the throne.
There is a reason why the only hero in the Bitcoin world disappeared: luckily, I must say, the Bitcoin ecosystem is prone to kill its idols.
This is a good thing: Bitcoin must be free and not personalised.

[skarais]

~~~

I hope it’s very low.
I guess in the US the use of Coinbase is very prominent, and it offers a decent level of security for the organisation are not able to do self-custody.
Of course in case some of the state would embark in self custody the chance would skyrocket to very high!

It seems to me that the high risk of coin theft when many countries store their bitcoin self custody is one of the reasons why many countries do not store bitcoin. The more countries that do this, the greater the chance that one of them will experience hacking and theft, this is a reasonable concern, especially for third world countries and even developing countries.

I'm not sure how many countries have stored bitcoin self custody so far, it blinds me as to whether there have been any hacking cases.

[Agbamoni]

NEVER?
trumps promise?

Don’t get me started on politician promises.
I know the aren’t to be trusted, and also I know bitcoin doesn’t need heroes.
The only thing I was trying to convey is that Trump dismissing his own promises is not the central scenario this time.
Like I haven’t been surprised (on the downside) many times.

It’s wrong to keep trusting in Trump's words when the pattern is so clear.
Although he kept his promises about Bitcoin early on. He followed through with what he said at first but let us be real. I believe that was just a move to get people's attention to prove he is reliable.
If you still, ask me if Trump is so true on what he feels about Bitcoin is real. I cannot be completely so sure about it.

[LoyceV]

I guess in the US the use of Coinbase is very prominent, and it offers a decent level of security for the organisation are not able to do self-custody.
Of course in case some of the state would embark in self custody the chance would skyrocket to very high!

There's not much online about how exchanges really do it. I guess they're keeping it a secret so they're not giving attackers any ideas. I found this something, but I can't tell how reliable it is.
From my perspective, creating a secure offline private key is very easy. But I have no idea how to do this in such a way that you don't have to trust anyone (including yourself), and you're still able to recover the keys even if anyone involved in the creation is long gone, while also making sure none of the involved people can access the keys.