Recent discussions regarding a U.S. strategic Bitcoin reserve have evolved significantly over the past two years, moving from ambitious legislative proposals to more cautious measures. Initially, the BITCOIN Act, introduced in 2024, aimed to mandate the government’s purchase of one million BTC. However, the current iteration, known as the American Retirement and Monetary Advancement Act (ARMA), lacks any such purchase requirements.
The shift from an acquisition-focused approach to a custody-centered legislation is notable. Following an executive order signed by Donald Trump in March 2025, the federal government committed not to sell its existing Bitcoin holdings but did not mandate any new purchases. The response from the market was immediate, with Bitcoin’s price experiencing a sharp decline of 5.7% upon the announcement of the executive order. At that time, the government held about 190,000 BTC, amassed through criminal seizures and civil forfeitures, representing only 0.9% of Bitcoin’s total supply available.
In the years leading up to ARMA’s introduction, various congressional efforts aimed to integrate Bitcoin into the national financial framework. Senator Cynthia Lummis has been a longstanding advocate, pushing for the inclusion of Bitcoin in federal reserves since her entry into the Senate in 2021. In 2024, the narrative shifted as Bitcoin prices surged past $100,000, and proposals gained traction amidst regulatory changes favoring spot ETFs.
Lummis reintroduced the BITCOIN Act in March 2025, with the goal of acquiring 200,000 BTC annually over five years—aiming for a cumulative total of one million. Nevertheless, substantial opposition emerged, primarily due to concerns about the fiscal implications and potential threats to the U.S. dollar’s status as a global reserve currency. Moreover, Treasury Secretary Bessent’s public dismissal of additional bitcoin purchases further hindered the bill’s progress.
The introduction of ARMA in May 2026 reflects a strategic rebranding aimed at broadening support. The bill consolidates all U.S. held Bitcoin under the Treasury, prohibits its sale for two decades, and introduces a study mandate instead of a purchase obligation. This legislation prioritizes passage over aggressive acquisition.
Currently, two parallel bills are moving through Congress: the BITCOIN Act, which aims for acquisition, and ARMA, which serves a custodial function. ARMA is more likely to progress due to its bipartisan backing and lack of purchase mandate. However, its passage may not generate immediate positive effects for the Bitcoin market. While ARMA would secure existing government-held Bitcoin for two decades, it fails to create new demand by not mandating purchases, potentially limiting its market impact.
Looking ahead, if ARMA is enacted and Bitcoin is legally recognized as a national reserve asset, it could pave the way for renewed discussions about mandatory purchases as a future legislative goal. While the timeline for such developments is longer than initially anticipated, the groundwork being laid has the potential to influence Bitcoin’s status in the broader financial landscape over time.
The implications of these legislative changes remain to be seen, and analysts suggest the market may need to adjust its expectations as these bills continue to evolve. The path toward establishing a formal Bitcoin reserve in the U.S. is fraught with complexities, yet the discussions indicate a growing recognition of Bitcoin’s potential role in the federal financial structure.
