Treasury Secretary Bessent confirmed lack of authority to rescue the bitcoin market.
The Trump administration focuses efforts on the regulation of digital property.
President Donald Trump’s administration, by current statements by his Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, outlined a place of direct non-intervention within the face of the fluctuation within the worth of bitcoin (BTC).
On the time of writing, February 6, 2026, bitcoin is buying and selling beneath $67,000, following a worth drop that erased positive aspects recorded because the 2024 presidential election.
And though no particular assertion or direct reference to the decline has been issued in current days, current actions and statements by authorities officers are intrinsically linked to the present dynamics of the digital asset market, which has seen the longest drop since 2018.
Throughout a US congressional listening to on February 4, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, additionally chairman of the Monetary Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), appeared earlier than the Home Monetary Companies Committee and the Senate Banking Committee.
At the moment, going through questions from Congressman Brad Sherman, identified for his skepticism about cryptocurrencies, Secretary Bessent made clear the boundaries of govt authority.
“I haven’t got the authority to do it, and as chairman of the FSOC, I haven’t got it both,” Bessent acknowledged, referring to the Treasury Division’s capacity to order non-public banks to buy bitcoin or use public funds in a doable market rescue.
I would not have the authority to buy bitcoin with taxpayer {dollars}.
Scott Bessent, Secretary of the Treasury of the US.
These statements underline that, regardless of the rhetoric favorable to bitcoin, since its electoral marketing campaign, the federal government’s dedication it doesn’t embrace energetic intervention so as to add BTC to your reserves.
This reserve, made up of seized bitcoin, has generated income estimated at greater than $15 billion. Nevertheless, the Secretary emphasised that this reserve is passive in nature and is restricted to seized property, with out offering for added purchases with federal funds.
Bessent’s statements coincided with an acceleration of the decline within the worth of BTC, which misplaced roughly 15% in lower than 24 hours after the February 4 listening to.
These phrases from Bessent resonated all through the digital asset ecosystem, the place the expectation of extra aggressive state help had been excessive. In areas with excessive adoption of BTC as a refuge (within the face of inflation or devaluation), uncertainty was accentuated, mirrored in large reactions on social networks and boards.
The worldwide group expressed disappointment within the absence of direct help measures, though many acknowledge that bitcoin “doesn’t want the State.”
Bessent’s phrases distinction with the guarantees of Trump, who has expressed his intention to show the US into the “world capital of cryptocurrencies” and has promoted the creation of the strategic reserve of Bitcoin.
Nevertheless, the authorized limitations set forth by the Secretary of the Treasury present that authorities enthusiasm is channeled in direction of facilitating the regulatory atmosphere in stablecoins, for instance, and never in direction of components that will have a higher affect on the value of the asset.
Different voices from the Trump administration on bitcoin
Different key officers have articulated their imaginative and prescient with an emphasis on long-term regulation. David Sacks, the White Home cryptocurrency “czar,” has prioritized laws over the sector.
In current appearances, Sacks described stablecoins as “the brand new cost rails for the twenty first century,” anticipating a full integration of conventional banks into the digital asset ecosystem.
This imaginative and prescient factors to a unification between conventional and digital finance, which might be perceived as much less decentralized, though perceived by some politicians as essential as a result of it strengthens long-term institutional stability and adoption.
For her half, Senator Cynthia Lummis—some of the distinguished Bitcoin advocates in Congress and lead writer of the BITCOIN Act of 2025 (S.954, reintroduced in March 2025 to spice up the Bitcoin strategic reserve introduced by Trump through govt order)—has actively held discussions on methods to strengthen the US place in digital property.
Actually, on the February 5, 2026 Senate listening to earlier than the Banking Committee (the place Bessent introduced the FSOC annual report), Lummis instantly questioned the Treasury Secretary on key points corresponding to the potential for use gold reserves or different mechanisms to accumulate extra BTCproposals that Bessent rejected, reiterating the shortage of govt authority for purchases with public funds or direct interventions available in the market.
Lummis additionally pushed for higher regulatory readability on tax issues, together with a possible tax exemption for small bitcoin transactions and clear steering on calculating capital positive aspects on blended portfolios, signaling his willingness to collaborate with the Treasury Division to make progress in these areas.
His legislative work enhances David Sacks’ strategy in selling frameworks for the regulation of digital property. This with the concept of integrating conventional finance with the bitcoin and cryptocurrency ecosystem, selling institutional adoption with out relying on direct interventions corresponding to asset purchases.
And though the brand new Cryptocurrency Legislation stays in committee (Senate Banking, Housing and City Affairs) with out important progress in direction of its approval, Lummis has emphasised that regulatory readability and banking integration are priorities to counter world dangers and keep American management.
Given all this, it’s clear that Donald Trump’s authorities doesn’t have direct measures in thoughts that may affect the bitcoin market. Their technique focuses on establishing a regulatory framework for the digital asset sector, selling stablecoins, and passively managing the strategic reserve of seized property, quite than actively intervening in a dynamic that might be mirrored in costs, as maybe the group anticipated.
