US Strategic Reserve; is it right to actually use seized assets as reserves

[EL MOHA]

Just days after The US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent announced that the country which is actually setting up a bitcoin strategic reserve is not looking to buy bitcoin. With the intent of actually keeping the 200k bitcoin which is heavily reported to seized bitcoins in their possession as reserve.

Just after that a blockchain analytics platform Arkham reported that $300k value of coins have been moved to the government account from coinbase and it was reported to be siezed from an Hacker

Even though this is not bitcoin but is this the new method of which US are trying build their own reserve by holding siezed assets

My question is; is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

Does Not buying bitcoin actually signifies that they don’t believe in bitcoin at all and are only fulfilling campaign promises.

[Dunamisx]

They are just telling us that these seized coins are in a wallet in which we don't know for sure if truly they are there or just on the news we are hearing and nothing like that exists on the wallet, just imagine now that if such amount could be withdrawn from the wallet, how sure are we that the money remaining exists, who are those in charge and making withdrawals and for what purpose are they doing this.

Secondly, only US I see that can blast on what is not theirs and still claims an investment upon, using the confiscated coins from the public funds is totally a wrong approach to Bitcoin National Reserve, they have another agenda different from all these we are seing.

[Ambatman]

The scary part is how far are they going to go in considering an holdings worth seizing
It won't be surprised if innocent users would be affected.

is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

What's the difference with what they are doing?
choosing not to sell now doesn't rule out the fact that they would in the future.

Does Not buying bitcoin actually signifies that they don’t believe in bitcoin at all and are only fulfilling campaign promises.

Bitcoin and Government, Weird mixture.

[Nwada001]

Even though this is not bitcoin but is this the new method of which US are trying build their own reserve by holding siezed assets

My question is; is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

It's not a new method, and this is not just something done by the US; most governments have seized a significant amount of coins that are linked to whateverthey tag it as. As long as they consider it to be against their rules, they will seize it.

The only thing new here now is that they have suspended selling all the seized coins; rather, they choose to keep them instead as their reserve, but anything can still change in the future, and they may decide to auction it off.

The thing here is, individuals should just be careful not to mistakenly and unknowingly use their own hand to link their holdings to a government-targeted address that has been suspected to be linked to illicit activities because they will claim the coin, and the chance of the individual getting it back will be very slim.

[Potato Chips]

Does Not buying bitcoin actually signifies that they don’t believe in bitcoin at all and are only fulfilling campaign promises.

Not necessarily IMO. I mean, why spend when you already have huge sats in limbo. In addition, I think this seizing can be pretty lucrative, I would guess more will come soon, and their bags will be bigger. Whether the platform deserves to be seized is a different story though.

is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

They will sell it off at some point, but for now they will hodl.

[CryptoYar]

This recent news is big deal. In past government would sell off criminal assets but now they are treating Bitcoin as long term strategic asset similar to gold. This decision is politically good because it allows them to build significant holding of digital asset without using taxpayer money which would be very risky. But this move does not mean government fully accept Bitcoin but creating this reserve showing they believe it will continue to be important in future even if they are not willing to buy it on open market.

[Darker45]

Right? I think so. I don't see any reason why it's otherwise. Why does it have to be auctioned or sold? Those are seized in favor of the government. In other words, they're assets of the government now. What makes it wrong to keep them rather than sell them?

Don't mention about government genuinely believing in Bitcoin. That's not true. That'll never be true. The government itself is an antithesis to Bitcoin's philosophy.

Anyway, I don't think you have to worry about them not buying. They probably will at the right time. Also, it needs more than just an order from the president when the government uses money to buy Bitcoin for a strategic reserve. I guess it will have to pass through congress. And it's going to be hard. That's why the easy option is to accumulate Bitcoin without using taxpayers' money. Keeping seized Bitcoin is just one of them.

[SilverCryptoBullet]

Just days after The US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent announced that the country which is actually setting up a bitcoin strategic reserve is not looking to buy bitcoin. With the intent of actually keeping the 200k bitcoin which is heavily reported to seized bitcoins in their possession as reserve.

Just after that a blockchain analytics platform Arkham reported that $300k value of coins have been moved to the government account from coinbase and it was reported to be siezed from an Hacker

Even though this is not bitcoin but is this the new method of which US are trying build their own reserve by holding siezed assets

My question is; is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

Does Not buying bitcoin actually signifies that they don’t believe in bitcoin at all and are only fulfilling campaign promises.

Right or not right thing to do, I don't know as it depends on many details.

If it is bitcoins seized from criminals and there is no victims that can claim their stolen bitcoins back, I think government can do it rightly. Oppositely if there are victims of those criminals, and they are waiting for final judgement from law suits in order to have rights to claim their bitcoins back, government will do unright action to use those bitcoins as the USA national Bitcoin strategic reserve.

Righ or not right action, Bitcoin is beneficial from this impactful strategic reserve as it reduces available bitcoin in free float on the market and reduce selling pressure too.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

My question is; is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

To be honest, I think your question is a bit silly. The government can do whatever it wants with seized assets. It usually auctions them off because the money is more useful than the assets. In other words, if it seizes trucks, real estate and tools, for example, it is more useful to sell them and use the money than to keep the assets. They also often seize cash, which they do not auction off. Have you ever thought about that?

So, if a certain type of asset is more useful to keep than to auction, it's normal for them to do so.

[fruktik]

They are just telling us that these seized coins are in a wallet in which we don't know for sure if truly they are there or just on the news we are hearing and nothing like that exists on the wallet, just imagine now that if such amount could be withdrawn from the wallet, how sure are we that the money remaining exists, who are those in charge and making withdrawals and for what purpose are they doing this.

Secondly, only US I see that can blast on what is not theirs and still claims an investment upon, using the confiscated coins from the public funds is totally a wrong approach to Bitcoin National Reserve, they have another agenda different from all these we are seing.

With Trump as president, the US has become something insignificant and gloomy. You can no longer be sure of anything. Maybe you are right about these funds. It is also possible that someone has appropriated them. If Americans do not wake up soon, then a national catastrophe is guaranteed. It is time to kick the red-haired old man in the ass and put him in the electric chair for all his deeds. We need to do this before it gets even worse. Cryptocurrencies are reacting well to the antics of this fool and not in the best way.

[betswift]

To be honest, I think your question is a bit silly. The government can do whatever it wants with seized assets. It usually auctions them off because the money is more useful than the assets. In other words, if it seizes trucks, real estate and tools, for example, it is more useful to sell them and use the money than to keep the assets. They also often seize cash, which they do not auction off. Have you ever thought about that?

So, if a certain type of asset is more useful to keep than to auction, it's normal for them to do so.

Also, they have laws for assets or things that were seized. They usually need to do what needs to be done.

[Plaguedeath]

Yes it's their right!

We support communities by transferring certain types of forfeited assets to state, local and nonprofit organizations. Through the Operation Goodwill program, forfeited real or personal property of marginal value can be transferred to state or local governments in support of drug abuse treatment, drug crime prevention and education, housing, job skills and other community-based public health and safety programs.

[fikrett]

Yes it's their right!

We support communities by transferring certain types of forfeited assets to state, local and nonprofit organizations. Through the Operation Goodwill program, forfeited real or personal property of marginal value can be transferred to state or local governments in support of drug abuse treatment, drug crime prevention and education, housing, job skills and other community-based public health and safety programs.

Yep, if we do it with these things, we can do it with BTC too.

Loopholes will be found anyways eventually

[shield132]

Just days after The US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent announced that the country which is actually setting up a bitcoin strategic reserve is not looking to buy bitcoin. With the intent of actually keeping the 200k bitcoin which is heavily reported to seized bitcoins in their possession as reserve.

Just after that a blockchain analytics platform Arkham reported that $300k value of coins have been moved to the government account from coinbase and it was reported to be siezed from an Hacker

~snip~

Even though this is not bitcoin but is this the new method of which US are trying build their own reserve by holding siezed assets

My question is; is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

Does Not buying bitcoin actually signifies that they don’t believe in bitcoin at all and are only fulfilling campaign promises.

I believe that if there is a part of the asset that's collected via scamming people, the government should continue the investigation to find victims and give them back their money. They are getting very good at blockchain analysis, so they should be good at finding victims, too. Although I highly doubt they'll do this, it's a good idea to hold them because they are going to buy Bitcoin anyways, so why should they sell them? Btw I don't know if the law requires seized assets to be sold. This topic can be discussed very well by those who finished law at University.

Yes it's their right!

We support communities by transferring certain types of forfeited assets to state, local and nonprofit organizations. Through the Operation Goodwill program, forfeited real or personal property of marginal value can be transferred to state or local governments in support of drug abuse treatment, drug crime prevention and education, housing, job skills and other community-based public health and safety programs.

Lots of money is laundered and unwisely spent that way. From my experience, the majority of similar organisations don't do things as we imagine they'll be doing. I have a neighbour who was working in a charity and as he told me, most of the money isn't really spent on those who need it but on those who are in charge of the organisation.

[mindrust]

Donny is the one who makes the rules. He decides what’s right and what’s wrong so it is pointless to ask if what he is doing with the seized btc is right.

He might sell them, he might build a strategic reserve or a wealth fund with them. Who is going to tell him he is doing it wrong?

As long as he is doing something for the American people with those funds nobody can say anything which he seems to be doing exactly that.

[Rikafip]

My question is; is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

In majority of cases they do sell seized assets, but afaik they don't have to do it if they think they can use it some other way, like for example seized cars. And even if there wa a rule that they have to sell it, they could easily change that law in order to keep whatever they want.

Does Not buying bitcoin actually signifies that they don’t believe in bitcoin at all and are only fulfilling campaign promises.

Let me ask you this: does them not selling seized bitcoin signifies that they "believe" in bitcoin?

[nemesis_incarnate]

My question is; is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

In majority of cases they do sell seized assets, but afaik they don't have to do it if they think they can use it some other way, like for example seized cars. And even if there wa a rule that they have to sell it, they could easily change that law in order to keep whatever they want.

Entities up above will think ten times before doing anything, and then choose what suits them (not the crypto space by any means) best. It was always like that and it will stay that way..

[ultrloa]

Just days after The US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent announced that the country which is actually setting up a bitcoin strategic reserve is not looking to buy bitcoin. With the intent of actually keeping the 200k bitcoin which is heavily reported to seized bitcoins in their possession as reserve.

Just after that a blockchain analytics platform Arkham reported that $300k value of coins have been moved to the government account from coinbase and it was reported to be siezed from an Hacker

Even though this is not bitcoin but is this the new method of which US are trying build their own reserve by holding siezed assets

My question is; is this actually right? I think this assets are supposed to auction or sold off?

Does Not buying bitcoin actually signifies that they don’t believe in bitcoin at all and are only fulfilling campaign promises.

If there asset is in there position and no one can take it from them then yes they could able to do it especially if all legislators would agree on what their President want to happen.

Also they already made that decision and so far US is doing good for holding lots of Bitcoin coming from those seize assets they get from somewhere else.

But look at this they are also open on possibilities buying Bitcoin https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-treasury-still-exploring-budget-neutral-bitcoin-buys-secretary-says so for sure that they won't stop doing those things they currently done like relying on seize assets since for sure they are thinking about buying to increase their Bitcoin volume, remember they always want to be on top.

[FortuneFollower]

If there asset is in there position and no one can take it from them then yes they could able to do it especially if all legislators would agree on what their President want to happen.

Also they already made that decision and so far US is doing good for holding lots of Bitcoin coming from those seize assets they get from somewhere else.

But look at this they are also open on possibilities buying Bitcoin https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-treasury-still-exploring-budget-neutral-bitcoin-buys-secretary-says so for sure that they won't stop doing those things they currently done like relying on seize assets since for sure they are thinking about buying to increase their Bitcoin volume, remember they always want to be on top.

Profit and prestige are about to be made, suits would never lose such an opportunity, after all, Trump himself said one time that he wants BTC to be "US-made".

[Gozie51]

What I can make of this is that the US government seized those coins and of course those coins have to be transferred to a government wallet and not individual wallet. So since the strategy reserve policy or order is already in existence, it was plausible to hodl those coins there for the time being. From the post, we have not yet heard that they have finally converted it to their own reserve but seized them from hackers.

There are various reasons that government can seize assets, coins, fiat or gold and they are basically for economic control, if it is gotten through criminal acts like hacking, drug trafficking and other illegal means.

As for the current seizure, let's keep our fingers crossed probably it may be redistributed to owners if traceable, auctioned or at worse used for the economy.