Everything you wanted to know about Bitcoin Strategic Reserve

[Arenga pinnata]

While going through on X I bumped on this and I was like wow! Michael Saylor has made another move by purchasing this number of Bitcoin even when some folks are still scared I mean contemplating whether to accumulate or not. This is really motivating to me I don't know about others because this shows that Saylor trust so much in Bitcoin and perhaps there is something he saw people and yet to see in Bitcoin and I ask myself when i saw this news that if Saylor can purchase with this amount then why won't I continue accumulating regardless of my discretionary.

They will continue to do so even when the market turns bearish. After all, Microstrategy began accumulating bitcoin when the price was still around $11,654, with a total purchase of 21,454 bitcoin at that time. And remember, bitcoin also fell a few weeks after they made their first purchase. At that time, Bitcoin actually dropped to around $10,422. However, what happened was that they bought even more Bitcoin at that price, with a total purchase of 16,796 Bitcoin. They are truly pioneers in this regard. And I think they will continue to do so now as well.

Just look, they've even bought more.  


(Sourch: https://bitbo.io/treasuries/microstrategy/)

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

But I have to ask:  Is it really a good thing when governments and/or large institutions with deep pockets start buying up bitcoin in bulk?  I'm thinking about what the community consensus might be if that question was asked maybe 5 to 10 years ago. 

Yes, the buying pressure might cause a bump in price, but there might be some potentially (and very seriously) negative consequences that people here aren't seeing because they've got dollar signs in their eyes.

People only want free lunches, and upward effects from bulk purchases from governments and institutional investors while they ignore and don't accept a fact that after buying, entities that are either governments, institutional investors or retail investors will have need of selling their coins some days.

If they hope and see upward effect on price from institutional investors, rightly at that time they must be aware of possible downward effect from these same institutional investors in the future. Because there is no centralized power to control institutional investors and force them buying but restrict them selling their coins in the future.

If Bitcoin market is like this, only opened for buyers but restricted for sellers, who will be the sellers for buyers to buy coins and who will want to be sellers as they know later they will be restricted with selling.

[ultrloa]

If they really start buying Bitcoin as reserves, it will definitely have a positive impact on the global Bitcoin market. Since the Bitcoin price is low, this decision will be a profitable option for the future.

Maybe.  Probably. 

But I have to ask:  Is it really a good thing when governments and/or large institutions with deep pockets start buying up bitcoin in bulk?  I'm thinking about what the community consensus might be if that question was asked maybe 5 to 10 years ago. 

Yes, the buying pressure might cause a bump in price, but there might be some potentially (and very seriously) negative consequences that people here aren't seeing because they've got dollar signs in their eyes.

What we commonly knew is those institutional demands could drive more attentions and possibly price would rise up with their presence, since their participation would add up some credibility on Bitcoin.

But those actions they made also have consequences, since it may change the culture of Bitcoin and risk it might be manipulated by this institutions. They can provably do everything they want especially if they established that they hold huge volume of Bitcoin also power to manipulate the market.

So this situation is double edge sword for the community.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

the average Joe had enough time to invest in BTC at very low prices because the big players (at least publicly) got involved only around 2020.

I'd have to politely disagree with you somewhat there, only because it's only been in the last few years that bitcoin has become as mainstream as it is.  I remember a long period after I got interested in it (which was 2014ish) when it seemed like nobody in real life knew what the hell bitcoin was--and believe me, I would ask people any chance I got.  So the 'average Joe' was probably ignorant of cryptocurrency in general right up until COVID or maybe just before and thus they didn't get as much of a chance to buy in at a low price as you'd think.

That's how I see it anyway.  Damned if I can make any excuses for myself as to why I'm not wealthy and living on some sunny tropical island.  It was sheer ignorance of what makes bitcoin special and sets it apart from fiat currencies.  Wouldn't call myself a low-IQ moron, but sometimes I'm just too damn slow on the uptake.

In any case, it's nice to see members like you agreeing that bitcoin in governments' or institutional investors' hands isn't a good thing, not even for the price should any big player decide to dump all of their holdings on the market (they'd be stupid to do that all at once anyway, but at the moment I'm seeing a lot of stupidity on the part of powerful decision makers who ought to be smart and exercising more restraint than they are).

Any day I'm gonna wake up from this madness.  Any day now.

[Wind_FURY]

the average Joe had enough time to invest in BTC at very low prices because the big players (at least publicly) got involved only around 2020.

I'd have to politely disagree with you somewhat there, only because it's only been in the last few years that bitcoin has become as mainstream as it is.  I remember a long period after I got interested in it (which was 2014ish) when it seemed like nobody in real life knew what the hell bitcoin was--and believe me, I would ask people any chance I got.  So the 'average Joe' was probably ignorant of cryptocurrency in general right up until COVID or maybe just before and thus they didn't get as much of a chance to buy in at a low price as you'd think.

That's how I see it anyway.  Damned if I can make any excuses for myself as to why I'm not wealthy and living on some sunny tropical island.  It was sheer ignorance of what makes bitcoin special and sets it apart from fiat currencies.  Wouldn't call myself a low-IQ moron, but sometimes I'm just too damn slow on the uptake.

In any case, it's nice to see members like you agreeing that bitcoin in governments' or institutional investors' hands isn't a good thing, not even for the price should any big player decide to dump all of their holdings on the market (they'd be stupid to do that all at once anyway, but at the moment I'm seeing a lot of stupidity on the part of powerful decision makers who ought to be smart and exercising more restraint than they are).

Any day I'm gonna wake up from this madness.  Any day now.

It's not just you. There are many of us plebs who were VERY slow on the uptake. We can tell by merely looking at the user's Date Registered and whether he or she is participating in a signature campaign. There are also some users who joined BitcoinTalk during 2011, has the Donator badge, but he/she is still in a signature campaign.

2011. That's a missed Golden Opportunity - the most Golden of the most Golden of Opportunities.

[MusaMohamed]

I'd have to politely disagree with you somewhat there, only because it's only been in the last few years that bitcoin has become as mainstream as it is.  I remember a long period after I got interested in it (which was 2014ish) when it seemed like nobody in real life knew what the hell bitcoin was--and believe me, I would ask people any chance I got.  So the 'average Joe' was probably ignorant of cryptocurrency in general right up until COVID or maybe just before and thus they didn't get as much of a chance to buy in at a low price as you'd think.

Bitcoin has grown well with time and cycles but the Covid-19 and massive money printed by governments globally actually is very strong contributor to Bitcoin soar in the last cycle. Goes to mainstream or not, as I am a person with strong belief in Bitcoin future, I know that it will come, and Bitcoin Spot ETFs will be approved if not in 2024, will be in later years.

The pandemic has positive effects on Bitcoin market from global money printings but also in a way of quarantined people who have more spare time and available money to look for potential things for spending money. Many of them saw bitcoin as a potential investment asset, and with available money, they went quite easily into the market.

In this market cycle, it lacked of such contributors, no new capital when central banks globally have tried to retrieve money printed in 2020 and 2021 back.

[Abuobyda218]

Germany is not far behind other countries in the world that have introduced zero percent capital gains tax on Bitcoin. Recently, news has been published that Germany will apply zero percent capital gains tax on Bitcoin holdings for more than a year.
The zero percent tax policy will encourage private investment in Germany because in Germany, previously, profits above $600 were taxed and most likely 20 to 45 percent, but currently, the zero percent tax policy in Germany will create a huge incentive for small-scale investors.

Germany Offers Tax-Free Bitcoin Gains After 12 Months

[moneystery]

🏛️ Missouri's Bitcoin Strategic Reserve Fund bill advanced in a committee vote this week.

Missouri House Bill 2080
Status
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 3)
Status: Introduced on January 7 2026 - 25% progression
Action: 2026-03-12 - HCS Reported Do Pass (H) - AYES: 6 NOES: 2 PRESENT: 0

After MO HB 2080 introduced for the Bitcoin Strategic Reserve Fund earlier this year, the bill has now advanced to the next stage with a 6-2 vote in the House Committee. This bill is an attempt to allow the state treasurer to receive, invest, and hold digital assets under certain circumstances. While it still needs to pass the Rules Committee and a full House vote, this bill is a significant step by Missouri to demonstrate its interest in Bitcoin.



MO HB 2080 Progress summary:

✅ Introduced
✅ Passed 2 readings in the House
✅ Approved by the House Commerce Committee (6-2 vote)
🕒 Pending in the House Rules Committee
❌ Not yet approved by the full House
❌ Not yet debated/voted on in the Senate
❌ Not yet signed by the Governor


🏛️ Updates on Arizona Senate Bill 1649

After successfully passing the Senate Finance and Rules committees, AZ SB1649 passed a significant milestone, with the full Senate voting 16-13 to pass the bill, and now awaits approval by the House of Representatives. This marks the halfway point in the legislative process.

AZ SB1649 Progress summary:

✅ Introduced
✅ Passed 2 readings in the Senate
✅ Approved by the Senate Finance Committee
✅ Approved by the Senate Rules Committee
✅ Passed the full Senate (Third Reading)
🕒 Pending introduction/assignment in the House of Representatives
❌ Not yet signed by the Governor


🏛️ Updates on Tennessee Senate Bill 2639

This is also a bill that's making quite good progress. After passing two readings in the Senate, it's now being recommended by the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee to advance to the Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee. It still has some time before it can reach the full Senate, but it's progressing well.

TN SB 2639 Progress summary:

✅ Introduced
✅ Passed 2 readings in the Senate
✅ Approved by the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee
🕒 Pending in the Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee
❌ Not yet approved by the full Senate
❌ Not yet debated/voted on in the House of Representatives
❌ Not yet signed by the Governor

[fillippone]

Firstly, I don’t think this news has anything to do with the topic of this thread.
Secondly, this is not a news, but something that was true at least for the last few years.
Please be responsible when posting.

[JayJuanGee]

Firstly, I don’t think this news has anything to do with the topic of this thread.
Secondly, this is not a news, but something that was true at least for the last few years.
Please be responsible when posting.

Fillippone.  I don't want to be argumentative, yet there can sometimes be a bit of overlapping of topics, and surely members should be at least attempting to provide some kind of a description to relate their posting to the topic of the thread - even though I am sometimes guilty of the same thing in terms of responding to other members and then ending up going into a topic that is no longer related to the thread.

Personally, I find all kinds of governmental actions to be relevant to each other, so the extent to which they are building a reserve, or maybe they start accepting payments or maybe they start to seize bitcoin or maybe they are tolerant (and even permissive) of their citizens (or sometimes they are not citizens, people under their jurisdiction) to transact without burdens, which ends up affecting the extent to which the government is trying to get revenue from bitcoin transactions (which might be a more laudable goal than their merely trying to monitor and control people in their jurisdiction).

I remember at some point, you made a post in this thread to proclaim that members posting here were being way too expansive in their ideas about bitcoin reserves, when instead you were considering the thread to have had been about government actions in relation to bitcoin reserves - yet we still have posts that continue with expansive perspectives about bitcoin reserves, which seems to be less on topic than our thinking about the various ways that governments are treating and dealing with bitcoin, whether it is reserves or other ways that they might be trying to legitimize the use of bitcoin.. which surely we see the government twats being permissive in regards to how rich people (or maybe it is financial institutions and other institutions that rich people manipulate to their advantage) as compared with how normies are able to transact with bitcoin without having to jump through monitoring, control and even burdens that come with having to potentially account and/or disclose their holdings -

... and surely some parts of the world are more burdensome than others in regards to the disclosures that their ever controlling governments are toying around with.. .  which is also an interesting perspective to the extent that Germany might be ongoingly allowing non-reporting (to the extent the the news is new?) as compared with other governmental entities going down the road of their proposing forms of wealth taxes, which may well start out with disclosures of wealth (ie The Netherlands), and I don't know how much these matters overlap when we are talking about various forms of governmental actions and the extent to which they might create reserves for themselves (and have different rules) on the governmental and institutional levels as compared to what plebs are allowed to do.. and yeah, maybe that isn't a topic of this thread, even though it is an ongoing area of concern.. to the extent that normal people are not always so good at figuring out how to embroil themselves into some kind of institution so that they are able to cover up their own individual transactions to make it seem like the transactions of the institution, which poor people are not able to do that, to the extent that governments have goals of taxiing versus monitoring and controlling...

I know.  I know.  I know.  Everything is not related to everything, and this is not a thread about "what are the impacts of governmental actions?" thread.... .. Even though I personally continue to be interested in the various governmental actions, especially since the Trump pump that seemed to have had been largely based on the potential of more friendly governmental treatments of bitcoin.. yet it remains quite vague about how any supposed friendliness trickled down to bringing actual benefits for self-sovereignty aspects of citizens and even perhaps the ways that some of the framing of governmental accumulations of bitcoin or even allowing for various institutions to gobble up bitcoin to create paper bitcoin ha been helpful to actual normies in their abilities to transact without so many burdens of monitoring, accounting and that kind of crap that seems to inhibit freedom to the extent that there are any actual legitimate reasons to be tracking down criminals.