While all of crypto is on the edge of their seats waiting to see if the new Trump administration will move forwards with a national Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (SBR), six U.S. states have put forward their own SBR bills. But not all of these bills are made equal – in fact, there’s significant differences between them regarding funding sources and methods of accumulation.
Let’s take a look at the differences between the state bills and demystify what they actually propose
Oklahoma Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill
The Sooner State is the most recent to throw their hat in the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve ring. This week, Representative Cody Maynard introduced HB1203 with help of the Oklahoma Bitcoin Association, which would allow the state treasury to invest in bitcoin and digital assets with a market capitalization exceeding $500 billion (any digital asset that averaged a $500 billion market cap over the previous year would fit the bill).
Astute readers may observe that, while the bill is inclusive of all digital assets, only bitcoin passes the bill’s market capitalization requirement of $500 billion. A higher market cap requirement is a reasonable protection to prevent the state from acquiring bottom-of-the-barrel shitcoins, but $500 billion is also a clever level which precludes any other cryptocurrency but bitcoin.
The bill allows for up to a 10% allocation from the state’s general fund, revenue stabilization fund, and constitutional reserve fund into bitcoin and digital assets. It also includes clear language, definitions, and guidelines for staking, stablecoin compliance, and custody.
We give this Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill an S-tier rank because of its crypto-neutral (but bitcoin-forward!) language and clarity on additional guidelines. Disclosure: an author of this article was involved in making this bill happen.
Wyoming Bitcoin Strategic Reserve bill
A handful of Wyoming Representatives and one Senator sponsored a January 17 House bill which would “authoriz[e] the investment of state funds and permanent funds in Bitcoin.”
The bill stipulates that the state treasurer may use the state’s general fund, the permanent land fund, and mineral trust fund to purchase bitcoin as long as the allocation does not exceed 3% of the net worth of these funds; if the value of the bitcoin in the reserve appreciates above the 3% threshold, then the treasurer does not need to sell any coins to rebalance it, but he or she also cannot purchase any more bitcoin until the allocation falls back below 3%. Further, the bill mandates that the treasurer can custody the reserve through a “qualified custodian,” directly through a”secure custody solution,” or via an exchange traded fund/product provider.
“Wyoming is the state that is always known to be the first or the last to do anything. If Wyoming is second to pass this, it’s going to feel like last.” Representative Wasserburger told Blockspace.
“The great state of Wyoming is [one of] the only part time state legislatures, so we are able to move things here more quickly. It’s essential that Wyoming passes this bill because, as the rest of this country continues to do so, Wyoming will be able to benefit from the rest of the country’s mass adoption. It all lies in the hands of the Wyoming 68th legislature to not let this opportunity pass by, for it will forever be known as the biggest mistake Wyoming made,” he continued.
We give this Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill an A-tier rank because of its 3% allocation target and multiple custody provisions.
New Hampshire Bitcoin Strategic Reserve bill
“Live Free or Die” is the official motto of New Hampshire, so it’s unsurprising that the state is on the forefront of sovereign asset adoption.
Introduced by Representative Keith Ammon, the bill goes beyond just digital assets to include precious metals like silver and gold. Notably, the bill does not actually mention bitcoin and just uses the term digital assets.
Similar to Oklahoma, New Hampshire also requires digital assets in the proposed reserve to have a market cap of at least $500 billion, excluding all cryptoassets besides Bitcoin. Also included in the bill’s language are clear definitions and guidelines for staking, stablecoin compliance, and custody.
Lastly, the bill would prevent New Hampshire from investing over 10% of total public funds (total $3.6 billion), which would cap the total investable amount to $360 million.
We give this Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill an S-tier rank because of its crypto-neutral language and clarity on additional guidelines.
Texas Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bills
Everything’s bigger in Texas, so of course the state has two proposed bills for a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve.
The most recent proposal, a Senate bill drafted by Texas Senator Charles Schwertner, allows “the state to own and hold bitcoin as a financial asset “– which somehow isn’t already allowed? – and also permits “persons, including residents of this state, to donate bitcoin to the state for deposit in the reserve to promote the shared ownership of and community investment in this state’s financial future.” The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts would steward this fund.
This bill also allows the legislature to designate up to 1% of any leftovers from the state’s biennial budget for the comptroller to purchase bitcoin.
The first proposal by Representative Giovanni Capriglione to the Texas House is a little less exciting, as it only allows for donations in bitcoin and not outright purchases.
“This fund allows the state to own Bitcoin as a financial asset and for Texans to voluntarily donate Bitcoin to promote a shared ownership and community investment in Texas’s financial future,” the legislation reads. “The comptroller may accept gifts, grants, and donations of Bitcoin from certain Texas residents or a governmental entity as defined by Section 2252.001, Government Code,” it continues.
Texas’ comptroller of the treasury would be responsible for custody of the bitcoin in the fund, and they would have to hold any donated coins for at least five years before being sold, transferred, or converted to another cryptocurrency.
We give the Texas Senate Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill a B-tier rank, because it allows for up to 1% allocation of the state’s leftover budget; we give the Texas House Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill a C-tier rank, since it only allows for donations in bitcoin and not outright allocation via state funds.
Pennsylvania Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill
In November of last year, Representative Mike Cabell introduced the first-ever Bitcoin Strategic Reserve bill for a U.S. state in the Pennsylvania House. This bill permits the Pennsylvania Treasury to invest state funds directly into bitcoin, as well as any public retirement funds to hold bitcoin.
“This legislation would permit the Treasurer to invest up to 10 percent of the State General Fund, the Rainy Day Fund, and the State Investment Fund in Bitcoin, a digital asset increasingly recognized as a hedge against inflation,” Cabell wrote in a memorandum.
This bill allows for perhaps the most aggressive allocation into bitcoin of any proposed state-level Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. But as Brady Dale at Axios points out, this bill is almost certainly kaput considering its two sponsors didn’t get re-elected.
We give this Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill an F-tier rank, mainly because it has little hope of materializing.
North Dakota Strategic Bitcoin Reserve resolution
A handful of Representatives for the North Dakota House submitted a resolution on January 14, 2025 that “encourag[es] the State Treasurer and State Investment Board to invest selected state funds in digital assets and precious metals.”
Now, this resolution is not a proper bill yet, although it could turn into one following legislative discussion. As it stands, the resolution doesn’t formally mention bitcoin, and there is no additional information regarding which state funds would be allowed to invest in digital assets or how much they could allocate to a digital asset reserve.
Since it’s not a proper bill yet and there’s scant information about it, we give this Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill a D-tier rank.
Ohio Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill
Last December, Representative Derek Merrin introduced a bill to the Ohio House that would allow the state’s treasury to allocate funds into a bitcoin reserve. “The treasurer of state may invest interim money of the state and amounts deposited to the Ohio bitcoin reserve fund in bitcoin,” the bill reads. It does not define any allocation limit or explicitly list any funds that the treasurer may use for the reserve.”
The bill stipulates that the Ohio treasurer may take direct custody through a secure solution or via a qualified custodian.
As with Pennsylvania, this bill will almost certainly go nowhere since Merrin lost his seat in last year’s November election.
We give this Strategic Bitcoin Reserve bill an F-tier rank since it does not define an allocation percentage or give many specifics, and its primary sponsor failed to secure reelection last year.
Will states beat the federal government to a Bitcoin Strategic Reserve?
Will any of these bills and proposals actually become law? It’s anyone’s guess, but considering there are six outstanding – and likely more to come – there’s a decent chance that we see one of these states add bitcoin to their reserves this year.
The silver tuna, though, is a federal Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. Trump thrust the idea into the spotlight during his Bitcoin 2024 keynote in Nashville with a swaggering promise to establish such a reserve. Now that he’s poised to take office in three days, the question tip-toeing on our tongues is: will he make good on this promise?
He could easily accomplish this with an executive order mandating that the United States can’t sell the ~200,000 BTC that the government holds from asset seizures. This is precisely what he promised during his keynote, but a subsequent administration could trivially unwind this action. And the current U.S. Marshals Service is doing its best to undermine this attempt in the Biden Administration’s final days by planning to sell 69,370 BTC via auction.
As detailed by the Bitcoin Policy Institute, there are other executive avenues that Trump could take to establish a U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. One route involves the Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF), a Depression-era fund established to give the Treasury the ability to act in global FOREX markets without congressional approval. The Treasury could potentially acquire bitcoin for the ESF using credit instruments, the Bitcoin Policy Institute argues.
The surest road to a U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, though, travels through congress. To this end, Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis introduced The BITCOIN Act last July. The bill would mandate the government to divest other U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve funds into bitcoin until it has acquired 1 million BTC – ~5% of Bitcoin’s total supply. This reserve would be geographically distributed, and the bill also includes a provision enshrining bitcoin self-custody rights for citizens.
Trump’s proposed executive order for a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve is the path of least resistance, but it’s also the easiest to dismantle. Lummis’ bill would create a near-unperishable mandate for a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, one that could only be undone by another act of Congress or by a Supreme Court ruling. It seems unlikely to us that Lummis bill will make it through the Senate, considering that Bitcoin is such a low priority to the suits in Washington – not to mention that many of them are owned by banks and other interests who are adversarial to Bitcoin.
All of that said, we believe that it’s much more likely that U.S. states will establish Strategic Bitcoin Reserves through legislative action first. And to those states, to quote incoming emperor president Trump, “good luck with your bitcoin and your crypto and whatever else you’re playing with!”