for clarification(update d580.pdf):
i can only guess it seems they dont want a rampant buy up session by multiple banks during ATH season and instead wait until the correction season(post ATH)

also
they aim for 1% but can buy(inflow) upto 2% but would be in breach if they buy(inflow) above 2%
when hoarding crypto assets they have a 5% of fiat value of reserve limit before they have to sell(outflow)

also
to note they have 2 groupings. group 1 are stablecoins of trad-fi,  group 2 are well known instable coins and their partnered ETF's, pegged tokens, etc. so the 2% max buys may not be a total of just bitcoin, but a mix of some bitcoin some pegged bitcoin derivative, some altcoins and some ETF

also it appears(im still reading and de-complicating verbage of latest standards) that of the group2(which bitcoin fits within) which has its own 2% and 5% limits of the group, a further limit is implied per asset hidden in the small print. whereby of the 2% of total fiat reserve being group 2inflow limit. within group 2, a 5% of group 2 is a limit of each asset type. 0.1% is equal to 5%per asset type of 2% of group

meaning(example):  
privatekey/multisig(self custody) bitcoin is 0.1% of total fiat reserve
ETF shares of exposure to bitcoin is 0.1% of total fiat reserve
some wrapped coin pegged to bitcoin is 0.1% of total fiat reserve
some altcoin is 0.1% of total fiat reserve
[16 other assets of this class]

so having direct self custody real bitcoin stored by central bank may end up being only 0.1% of fiat reserves

also(still translating jargon to common)
there would be a breach if each asset goes above 0.3% of total fiat reserve

p.s seems the basel committee slid in a limiter in the small print. which seems to be where self custody of real bitcoin would have a inflow of 0.1% of total reserves limit and would require selling(outflow) at 0.3% of total reserves. and so banks would need to also buy etfs pegged tokens and derivatives exposed to bitcoins price to fill the 2% of total reserves

to avoid breach they would need to increase fiat reserves to balance things out or sell assets to bring within limits

update(reading/de-jargonising latest final docs and smallprint today)
seems the bis basel committee hid a further limit which translates to the 2% buy-in(inflow) limit is of all instable crypto assets combined,
which each individual cryptoasset type within the group also has a limit.. meaning they cant just fill the 2% allowance with just bitcoin

p.s im sure america, uk, eu wont want to be part of the BIS in near future and instead want to set out their own international banking standards committee, seeing as BIS is the committee that is leaning towards offering CBDC and aiding in the BRICS process

funny thing is, with the EU being so tight on crypto with the Mica rules.. it turns out that of the banks that report to BIS, it is actually the EU that holds the most crypto of all them banks..(as of Q4 2023)
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/5522234.msg65014034#msg65014034

if you read all the commentary of the consultation periods. majority of central banks associated with the BIS were pushing the BIS to start making regulations to allow them to invest in crypto. so although not a requirement to invest EG forced to buy crypto.. the banks actually wanted permission/allowances to invest in crypto, previously not allowed

This move of the central banks to hold their reserve on Bitcoin is a promise to drainage other institutions to adopt the strategic the strategic reserve as well and once they do, it is sure of turning out to green lightening to the Bitcoin market in the main time.
I said main time because because on the series of adoptors buying Bitcoins gradually and steady is also how steady and gradually Bitcoin price would keep growing.

Therein is point we would even find the impact of those institutions which have not been able to buy Bitcoin yet because when the finally buys the Bitcoin in the future would contribute to further increase of Bitcoin.

So indirectly these slacking institutions later to adopt Bitcoin will also act as reserve of Bitcoin values as it would perform series of market increases but if every of the expected institutions come to adopt this strategic reserve at same time, the green lights of Bitcoin would come to a time of reaching it maximum price as there is no value of further adoptors that is weighty enough to bring increase to the markets.

Note: the regulatory compliance police states the central banks would not exceed to have it reserve on Bitcoin above 2%.
Although the future promises of Bitcoin price is not pegged on just the banks but also as the private institutions but while we considers the leadership of the governments facilities adopting Bitcoins, it as well encourages the private institutions to follow the trends. Let us also be aware that most of the institution resources are in corporation with the government with Central regulations.

Symbolically on this mode, the green lights will ever turnup even after the so yello or red lights. Then there should be that valuable reasons of adoptors to dive into the Bitcoin market.

just to make you and all readers of this topic aware
banks DO NOT have $188T

the $188T number is a ESTIMATE IF, yes IF the banks were magically able to sell all assets at the exact same millisecond where there are buyers that refuse to buy for less

now here is the thing.. there is no $188T money in existence.. much like the bitcoin market cap $2T is not of actual money held in reserve somewhere

instead these estimates/valuations are based on:
current market price for one unit * total units of asset

however if everyone start selling all assets, the current price for one unit would crash instantly

yep the first $1t sells would cause a double digit % drop of market price. the other $187T of assets would get to $0 meaning there would only be in true monetary transfer from buyer to seller of only a couple trillion of assets in real money

Of course, all those who hesitate to buy will return because it has become an official and valuable asset, banks also automatically buy it in large quantities for their reserves. What we fear is that users will later store their BTC in the bank, not in the wallet they have and should. Well, this will be chaotic and not much different from when they stored their fiat before and we know the biggest financial player ( Bankster) is actually the bank itself.

The world is becoming an increasingly strange place, because it's hard for me to explain to myself why the average person chooses complete chaos instead of some kind of stability and balance, and why people are fascinated with what we were once taught was completely wrong and undesirable. Donald and his "friends" have already amassed millions through their worthless meme coins, and now they have that greedy smile on their face because they know they can do it for at least another 4 years.

Banks are, of course, a much more important story that everyone should be focused on, but not only because they have the green light to allocate part of their assets to cryptocurrencies, but also because a paradox is happening in which not only banks, but also large companies and funds are trying to use BTC for their own profit - and for more than 10 years they have not only spoken against BTC, but also financed various fools to spread anti-BTC agendas.

What I want to say is that, on the one hand, all this potential money can contribute to the growth of the BTC price - but in the not so distant future, the majority of BTC could be found in the possession of banks, funds and companies - while also control over the largest mining farms could be held by these same entities.

It is no secret that BlackRock bought large shares in the largest mining farms, and that it clearly wrote that it retains the right to decide which chain will follow in the case of a fork, with the emphasis that it may be the chain that will not have the greatest support.

This will be a big challenge for BTC in terms of remaining as it is today, which means with a clearly defined max supply and being decentralized and based on PoW.

they still hold bitcoin as government reserve, they just changed legal tender laws due to the imf to that of where retailers now only voluntarily could accept bitcoin as payment(via a cex account) rather than old law(2021) mandating that retailers had to have a chivo account and had to accept bitcoin for payment should a customer ask to pay with btc

it was a kinda easy thing to drop to appease the IMF as el salvador was conned into getting retailers to accept LN:Msats using a shoddy LN access hub, pretending it was bitcoin 2.0 (the LN hub was the backbone of the original chivo wallet) which bottlenecked many users funds, so they never truly accepted onchain btc as the mandated legal tender