<100 subscribers
On March 24, Bo Hines, the Executive Director of President Trump's Digital Asset Advisory Committee, put forward a highly controversial suggestion—to use the profits from gold reserves to purchase Bitcoin in a "budget-neutral" manner to increase the country's Bitcoin reserves. Just a few days earlier, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) officially incorporated Bitcoin into the global economic statistical system. With Bitcoin's inclusion in the Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual (BPM7), central banks and statistical agencies around the world are required to record Bitcoin transactions and holdings in their balance of payments and investment position reports. This move is not only an official recognition of Bitcoin's influence in the international financial system but also signifies its gradual evolution from a speculative asset to a more institutionalized financial instrument. On an international level, Bitcoin has been eligible as a foreign exchange reserve option for countries since March 20.
However, returning to the US proposal, the most intriguing aspect is that the US suggests using gold—considered the "ultimate safe-haven asset" by the market—to exchange for Bitcoin. This proposal itself raises a fundamental question: Is gold still an undisputed safe-haven asset? If the answer is affirmative, then why, over the centuries from the ancient Greek and Roman times of gold coinage to the present, has no company adopted a similar aggressive model to that of MicroStrategy (formerly known as Strategy) to accumulate gold in the long term? As policymakers around the world re-examine the positioning of this emerging asset in the financial system, the US has already taken a stance. Can Bitcoin become the first shot in a financial paradigm shift?
OKG Research Launches Special Topic on "Trump Economics" in 2025
OKG Research launched a special topic on "Trump Economics" in 2025, which will continuously track the impact of the Trump 2.0 era on the cryptocurrency industry and global markets. This article will start with a comparison between Bitcoin and gold to dissect the deeper implications behind this intriguing US proposal.
Is the US Selling Real Gold?
The United States, with its official gold reserves of 8,133.5 tons, has ranked first globally for 70 years. However, a noteworthy fact is that this gold has not circulated in the market for a long time but has been stored in places such as the Fort Knox Gold Depository, Denver, and the New York Federal Reserve. Since the "Nixon Shock" in 1971 ended the Bretton Woods system, the US gold reserves have no longer supported the US dollar but have been kept as strategic reserve assets, which are generally not sold directly.
So, if the US is to use the "surplus of gold reserves" to purchase Bitcoin, the most likely method would be through gold-related financial instruments, rather than selling physical gold.
Historically, the US Treasury has been able to create dollar liquidity out of thin air by adjusting the book value of gold without increasing actual gold reserves. This method is essentially a "revaluation" operation of assets, which can also be seen as a form of alternative debt monetization.
Currently, the US Treasury has fixed the book value of gold on its balance sheet at $42.22 per ounce, a price far below the current market price of gold—$2,200 per ounce. If Congress approves an increase in the book price of gold, the value of the Treasury's gold reserves on the books will increase significantly. Based on this new price, the Treasury can apply to the Federal Reserve for more gold certificates, and the Federal Reserve will provide the Treasury with corresponding new dollars.
This means that the US can implement an "invisible dollar devaluation" without consulting other countries by adjusting the book value of gold, while creating large-scale fiscal revenue. These newly added dollar funds can be used to purchase Bitcoin, further increasing the US Bitcoin reserves. The fiscal revenue generated by gold revaluation not only provides funding support for Bitcoin purchases but may also drive up Bitcoin demand in a broader financial context. Stephen Ira Miran, an economic advisor to the Trump 2.0 administration, cited the "Triffin Dilemma," pointing out that the US dollar's status as the global reserve currency has led to long-term trade deficits for the US. Gold revaluation can help break this vicious cycle and avoid a spike in interest rates. In this scenario, Bitcoin will benefit from the adjustment without an excessive release of liquidity.
However, such a method, while seemingly able to drive other institutions and investors to follow suit and attract more liquidity into the Bitcoin market, cannot ignore the fact that if the market perceives a long-term trend of dollar devaluation, the global asset pricing system may change, and the price discovery mechanism of Bitcoin may become more uncertain.
The Gold Market Has Never Been Truly Free
If the US Treasury uses the method of revaluing gold to exchange the surplus "book value" for dollars to purchase Bitcoin, the Bitcoin market may experience short-term frenzy, but it will also face the risks of regulatory tightening and liquidity control. This is similar to how gold entered the "free pricing" era after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system—price fluctuations coexisting with opportunities and uncertainties.
However, the gold market has never been truly free.
Historically, in addition to being a safe-haven asset, gold has also played the role of a "shadow lever" in the monetary system. There are numerous examples of geopolitical games using gold, one of the most famous being the "Goldgate Incident" in the 1970s. At that time, the international credibility of the US dollar was impacted by the Vietnam War and other internal and external factors. To stabilize global market confidence in the dollar, the US increased the relative price of gold to protect the dollar. Additionally, in the 1980s, the Reagan administration intervened in the market price through "gold swaps"; in the 2000s, the Federal Reserve released liquidity through the gold leasing market to maintain the strong position of the dollar.
Moreover, the credibility of gold is not unbreakable. The figure of 8,133.5 tons has never been subject to an independent audit over the decades. Whether the gold in Fort Knox is intact has always been a "black box" issue widely debated in the market. More importantly, although the US government does not directly sell gold, it may manipulate its value through financial derivatives, such as the "book adjustments" mentioned earlier, to achieve shadow monetary policy operations.
The deeper question is, if gold is revalued to release dollar liquidity and Bitcoin becomes a dollar hedge tool, how will the market redefine credit? Will Bitcoin truly become "digital gold," or will it be absorbed and re-controlled by the dollar system like gold?
Will Bitcoin Become a Part of the US Shadow Monetary Policy Play?
If Bitcoin is potentially heading towards a fate similar to gold, being absorbed and controlled by the dollar system, as the US interest in holding Bitcoin rises, the market may enter a phase where "Bitcoin becomes a shadow asset"—officially recognizing the value of Bitcoin but limiting its direct impact on the existing system through policies and financial instruments.
Assuming the US government incorporates Bitcoin into its strategic assets and begins to hoard it, Bitcoin, as a decentralized asset, is different from traditional gold in that the government cannot directly control the supply or price of Bitcoin. However, the government can indirectly influence the price and market sentiment of Bitcoin through shadow institutions (such as Bitcoin ETFs or Bitcoin trust funds and other financial instruments).
These shadow institutions can use the liquidity and volatility of the Bitcoin market to "hoard" large amounts of Bitcoin, with the intention of releasing these Bitcoins at specific times to affect market supply and demand and price trends. This operation is similar to the "gold swaps" and "gold leasing" in the gold market, not involving actual Bitcoin transactions but achieving their goals through financial instruments and market strategies.
Bitcoin's Transparency vs. Gold's "Black Box"
Bitcoin is not a "black box" operation; all transactions are traceable on the chain. Bitcoin's decentralized nature gives it an advantage over gold in terms of transparency and auditability. As a native asset on the blockchain, all Bitcoin transactions are publicly auditable, and anyone can track the circulation of Bitcoin through on-chain data tools (such as OKX Explorer).
Moreover, Bitcoin's network is composed of decentralized independent nodes, each holding a complete transaction ledger and jointly verifying transactions. No single institution or country can tamper with or manipulate Bitcoin transaction data. Bitcoin does not rely on third-party audits. According to on-chain data from OKX Explorer, the total holdings of whale wallets (1,000+ BTC) remain between 30% and 35%, that is, 6 million to 7 million BTC. This alone is higher than the current ratio of Bitcoin stored in centralized exchange hot wallets, institutional custody, and ETFs. The funds in Bitcoin wallets on the chain are completely public and globally queryable.
The real-time efficiency is far superior to the gold reserve reports updated quarterly or annually by most countries. There will also be no recurrence of the situation where the US lost
