Former White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt (@patrickjwitt) says the administration remains interested in purchasing Bitcoin ($BTC) for the U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, but…
Original source excerpt
Former White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt (@patrickjwitt) says the administration remains interested in purchasing Bitcoin ($BTC) for the U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, but legal and operational…
Former White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt (@patrickjwitt) says the administration remains interested in purchasing Bitcoin ($BTC) for the U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, but legal and operational obstacles remain. Speaking on the November 9 episode of “What Bitcoin Did,” Witt described several approaches officials have explored. His comments concern possible ways to expand government holdings and do not announce an approved purchase program or completed open-market buying. The reserve’s original framework, established by executive order in March 2025, called for funding it with Bitcoin forfeited to the federal government. The order also directed officials to explore additional acquisitions through budget-neutral strategies that impose no incremental taxpayer costs. Witt said potential approaches include revaluing government gold, examining the Treasury’s Exchange Stabilization Fund, converting other government-held digital assets, or retaining Bitcoin received through certain taxes and fees. Those possibilities require legal review, particularly because Congress controls federal spending. He also said inconsistent agency records and custody practices have complicated a reliable accounting of existing holdings. Strengthening storage and security is another step that would need attention before further acquisitions. The distinction between interest and implementation remains crucial for crypto investors. A larger federal reserve could create additional demand, but Witt’s account leaves questions about financing, legal authority and timing unresolved. He also warned that an executive order provides less lasting protection than legislation because a future administration could reverse it.
AI context is not available for this statement. The original source can be read independently.