this is a setback in the adoption of bitcoin in el salvador, but i see that they also have no option to refuse since they also need loans for the government reforms they are running.

but from here we can see that the imf really hates countries that adopt bitcoin as their legal tender. they make weird rules against bitcoin to make countries that are related to bitcoin to reduce their closeness to it. basically a shameless institution.

fortunately, they still stand firm in their stance to make bitcoin a legal tender and continue to invest in it, even though there are rules that have changed.

when he was buying BTC he was buying it in the period(avg $45k) where if cashed out now would only be a 110% gain. he has not held long enough to hit a multi-cycle multiplier*.

*he was buying during 2021 ATH and we have yet to have the 2025 ATH, so not even one cycle has passed for him

 also by funding projects requires money spent, meaning when other surprises pop up, he then has to find money elsewhere. so while locking up funds in one hand left him empty handed with the other hand, causing him to need to go crying back to IMF daddy asking for some money. i kind of blame his financial advisors for not being better economists to have advised him when the best times to buy and sell bitcoin to maximise investments whilst not leaving them empty fiat handed.

the IMF have proven that el salvador(amongst other countries) are not sovereign countries but simply puppets to a international puppeteer, by back peddling a law that was a step in the direction of independence and sovereignty. and so they have now lost that chance, and made it harder to double back peddle to try to escape again later**

**basic common sense investment advise that even normal citizens should remember and listen to, dont throw all your excess income, savings and emergency fund into investments, because when surprises occur you have to either sell investments early or apply for credit(dont throw all eggs into one basket), keep an emergency fund/savings amount to cover financial surprises. so that you dont end up getting into further problems owing someone who puts conditions on you

If I remember correctly El Salvador was the first country to make bitcoin legal tender but the first country to drop it was the Central African Republic, not them.


This may seem harsh, but it shows us the truth: although El Salvador has made significant profits from its bitcoin investment but bitcoin cannot and is not the factor that has caused El Salvador's economy to improve in recent years as many people think. If bitcoin can really help them improve their national economies, they won't have to accept IMF regulations and borrow money from them.


As far as I know, most people still use USD instead of bitcoin and while this is seen as a step backwards, you are right, it has no significant impact at all.

The fact is that they started buying BTC during 2021 (if I'm not mistaken), and that during that period the price was much lower than today, with one very favorable period for investing during 2022 where the price dropped to only $15.5k. Then they bought much larger quantities, and then at one point the president decided to change the strategy to 1 BTC per day, which significantly slowed down the increase of their reserves.

It follows from all this that the president tried to sit on two chairs at the same time, but that he is increasingly choosing the chair offered to him by the IMF. Unfortunately, the IMF was just waiting for the right moment to put even more pressure on them, and it is not ruled out that in the future the ES will sell its BTC as a condition for a new loan.

OP is not saying El Salvador is no longer bullish on bitcoin nor is he spreading Fud, what he says is valid and as NotATether has shown evidence. You can see details: https://news.bitcoin.com/el-salvador-complies-with-imf-requirements-bitcoin-legal-tender-status-withdrawn/


El Salvador's bullish stance on bitcoin remains the same but we need to understand that the country's economy is very important and should take priority over anything else. I believe they did not want to do this but they had no choice and it is the IMF that should be criticized instead of El Salvador.

Yeah and that is what I exactly understand when I read a news article back in 2024 about the IMF's pressure towards El Salvador's Bitcoin policies since they have the loan deal which is the requirement to secure it so yeah there is no such impact it can do to hurt the Bitcoin industry.


Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20e3l3xllwo.amp

I think is good in both ways but then how long does this tend to last, Bitcoin ceasing to become a legal tender in El Salvador, I believe it's a positive negotiations between the IMF and El Salvador. I can't really tell the fate of Bitcoin now and in the future but then such monetary policy usually amount to a greater impacts cause there would be much benefits for the both parties so then with time every thing will fall in place.

They are withdrawing btc as legal tender for financial aspect of things. Not because they don't want it as a means of payment. Just read the first reply from the OP's post and we can understand why such move. Though at first glance, it is like a sad news for the crypto community. Because everyone was like praising their move when they made btc as legal tender in their country. And now, because of some financial obligations, they need to retract such regulation.

Because for now, the important thing is to take a loan from IMF. And for sure, this is for the welfare of its people. Maybe, there are certain clauses from the IMF that they need to comply, and having btc as legal tender is not one of them. For me, the move is understandable because they have monetary concerns here and IMF can provide that need.

Seriously, IMF is subverting foreign powers just to get their way?

But I guess El Salvador really needed that loan. I think they will re-introduce BTC as legal tender in the future.

Not that I agree that this will have any kind of long term impact on Bitcoin. Because it will not.

I've got a question here:  I've been reading Roger Ver's book Hijacking Bitcoin, and on pp.109 he states the following:


Note: I haven't read through the other, very long thread on El Salvador, nor am I a huge fan of Ver's.  I'm just curious as to whether what he stated in the above quote is the truth, a falsehood, or in some kind of gray zone.  

BTW, that book is pretty interesting from a perspective of bitcoin history even if it is an unvarnished advertisement for BCH.