This article is written by Tiger Research. News about the United States' strategic Bitcoin reserves has been circulating for nearly two years. The original BITCOIN Act (to be launched in 2024) centered on the government's proactive purchase of Bitcoin, while the ARMA Act contains no such provisions. Whether the market should see this as a positive is still an open question.

Key Points

In March 2025, Trump signed an executive order promising not to sell the Bitcoin already held by the federal government, but it did not require the purchase of new coins. Market expectations were higher, and when the contents of the order became clear, the Bitcoin price immediately fell by 5.7%.

Legislative efforts that began in 2024 have significantly regressed over the past two years: from a requirement to purchase 1 million BTC, it has devolved into a bill that only contains custodial obligations with no purchase requirements.

The most optimistic prospect currently is the American Retirement and Monetary Advancement Act (ARMA), which is not a purchase bill but a prohibition against the government selling the Bitcoin it holds for at least 20 years.

ARMA has limited short-term impact on the Bitcoin market, but in the long run, establishing Bitcoin’s legal status as a national reserve asset may reopen discussions about mandatory purchases, which would be positive for the market.

Background: What the United States has Done and Not Done

During the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly promised to establish a strategic Bitcoin reserve, which the market interpreted as the federal government becoming a direct buyer.

After the election, on March 6, 2025, Trump signed an executive order designating Bitcoin obtained through criminal investigations and civil forfeitures as a strategic reserve and instructing for permanent holding. The order did not instruct the acquisition of new Bitcoin, only promising not to sell the Bitcoin the government currently owns. Once the contents of the order were clarified, the Bitcoin price fell from about $92,000 to below $85,000.

At the time of signing, the federal government held about 190,000 BTC, which is approximately 0.9% of the total supply of 21 million. All of these Bitcoins came from criminal and civil proceedings, none were purchased.

The situation remains unchanged. Apart from the executive order, nothing has been incorporated into law.

Legislative History

Discussions that began in 2021 resulted in the first concrete bill in 2024, reintroduced in 2025, and restructured as ARMA in 2026. The main line of this evolution is a continuous compromise with political realities: the mandatory purchase volume went from something to nothing. Each revision made passage more feasible but simultaneously reduced market impact.

2024: Original Bill

Senator Lummis has been calling for the inclusion of Bitcoin in the Federal Reserve since entering the Senate in 2021. There was no consensus within Congress at that time, and the crypto winter of 2022-2023, along with the FTX collapse, made the environment even more unfavorable.

In 2024, the situation changed; Bitcoin broke past $100,000, and spot ETFs received regulatory approval. In July of the same year, Lummis proposed the first concrete legislation: requiring the purchase of 1 million Bitcoins within five years, holding them for at least 20 years, funded by the Federal Reserve's surplus account.

1 million BTC represents 4.76% of the total supply, exceeding the approximately 840,000 held by Strategy report. The bill automatically expired at the end of that congressional session.

2025: Reintroduction and Stagnation of Progress

In March 2025, the same month as the executive order, Lummis reintroduced the BITCOIN Act as Senate Bill 954. The core structure remained unchanged: purchasing 200,000 BTC per year, accumulating 1 million over five years, holding for 20 years. The revised version removed certain disposal prohibition exemptions, tightened holding obligations, and added four co-sponsors.

Market response was generally positive, but the bill faced substantial resistance on three fronts:

• Fiscal Cost: At then-current prices, 1 million Bitcoins were valued at several trillion won. Fiscal conservatives within the Republican Party view gold as a stable store of value while Bitcoin is seen as a speculative asset, opposing any mandatory purchase structure.
• Dollar Hegemony: Critics, led by Congresswoman Maxine Waters from the Democratic Party, argue that treating Bitcoin as a reserve asset would undermine the dollar's status as the global reserve currency.
• Secretary of Treasury's Position: In August 2025, Treasury Secretary Bessent publicly stated that the government would not seek additional Bitcoin purchases. As the official responsible for executing laws, he has explicitly opposed it.

The bill has since remained with the Senate Banking Committee.

2026: ARMA as Legislative Compromise

In May 2026, Congressman Nick Begich introduced the American Retirement and Monetary Advancement Act (ARMA), joined by Democratic Congressman Jared Golden as a co-sponsor. The name change itself is strategically significant: it aims to break away from the associations that previously hindered legislative progress and expand the coalition of supporters.

ARMA does two things: it consolidates all Bitcoin currently held or confiscated by the federal government into a single reserve managed by the Treasury, and it prohibits the sale of these Bitcoins for at least 20 years. The only exception to the disposal prohibition is for servicing national debt.

The decisive difference from previous bills is that ARMA contains no mandatory purchase requirement. The BITCOIN Act stipulated the purchase of 200,000 BTC annually, while ARMA completely removes this obligation. Instead, it instructs the Treasury and Commerce Departments to study and report within 180 days whether additional purchases can be achieved in a budget-neutral manner. The research task is not a purchasing task.

ARMA is essentially a custodial and holding bill rather than an acquisition bill. Its goal is to achieve passage, hence the structure has been adjusted accordingly.

Short-Term Outlook: Limited Market Impact

Currently, two bills are progressing concurrently in Congress. The BITCOIN Act (S.954) is in the Senate Banking Committee; ARMA is in the House. The objectives of the two differ: the BITCOIN Act is an acquisition bill, while ARMA is a custodial bill.

The probability of ARMA passing is higher. The BITCOIN Act has been stalled in committee for over a year, hindered by fiscal costs and support only from Republicans. ARMA has Democratic support and does not impose purchase obligations, eliminating the most common objections.

Even so, the passage of ARMA itself will not present a short-term benefit for the Bitcoin market. If ARMA takes effect, the approximately 320,000 BTC currently held by the federal government will be legally prohibited from entering the market for at least 20 years. The pressure for potential government sell-offs will disappear. However, the problem is that without any purchase obligations, there is no new demand. What the market wants is direct government purchases of Bitcoin, which ARMA does not provide. Its actual effect is closer to elevating the executive order from March 2025 to statutory status.

The key lies in what may happen after ARMA. Nick Begich, who has held Bitcoin since 2013 and was one of the co-sponsors of the BITCOIN Act in March 2025, publicly supports Bitcoin as a strategic asset. The structure of ARMA suggests a phased approach rather than a one-step solution: first establish the legal framework and then build upon it for acquisition tasks.

If ARMA passes, Bitcoin gains formal legal status as a national reserve asset, making the debate about mandatory purchases likely to resume on a firmer basis. The path to this outcome is longer than initially priced in by the market during Trump's campaign promises, but the direction has not changed.

In short, the passage of ARMA has limited short-term effects on prices. In the long run, it remains a constructive factor for the market, and if ARMA passes, the likelihood of eventual purchasing legislation will become more visible.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。