The House committee weighing legislation to codify the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve convenes at 14:00 UTC on September 16 for a markup — the committee stage at which members debate, amend, and vote on a bill's text. H.R. 8957, the American Reserve Modernization Act, is one of nine measures on the markup agenda, with the chairman determining the order of consideration. Members may amend the proposed substitute before deciding whether to send the bill to the full House.

A Statutory Test for an Executive Order

The Strategic Bitcoin Reserve traces its origin to a March 2025 executive order signed by President Donald Trump. That directive instructed the federal government to retain eligible forfeited Bitcoin, create a separate stockpile for other digital assets, and explore budget-neutral ways to acquire additional BTC.

H.R. 8957 would convert that executive policy, together with its management rules, into a statutory framework. The distinction matters: a future president could an executive order, but could not cancel a federal law without action from Congress.

What Today's Markup Will Not Decide

• It will not order an immediate Bitcoin purchase.
• It will not establish a one-million-BTC target.
• Committee approval would not enact the bill.

Treasury Would Have 180 Days to Formalize Two Structures

Under the proposed substitute, federal agencies would have 60 days after enactment to give the Treasury Department a complete accounting of the Bitcoin and other digital assets they hold, have seized, or control through another legal authority.

Treasury would then have 180 days to establish two separate structures: the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve for qualifying BTC and the Digital Asset Stockpile for qualifying non-Bitcoin assets. Agencies would transfer eligible holdings within 30 days after those structures were established.

"Qualifying" is an important limitation. The reserve would not automatically absorb every asset temporarily held by law enforcement. Bitcoin or other assets required to satisfy forfeiture laws, court orders, or victim claims would remain available for those purposes.

Bitcoin Would Be Locked Away While Other Assets Could Be Sold

The two structures would follow different rules. Bitcoin deposited into the reserve could not be sold, swapped, auctioned, pledged, or otherwise disposed of for at least 20 years — a marked departure from the government's historical practice of auctioning forfeited Bitcoin, including the U.S. Marshals Service sales of coins seized in the Silk Road case. Two years before that period ended, Treasury would have to advise Congress on whether the government should continue holding it or allow a controlled release.

After the holding period, Treasury could recommend selling up to 10% of the reserve during any two-year period. A permitted sale would require a formal rule designed to provide transparency and limit market disruption.

Treasury would have more flexibility with non-Bitcoin assets. It could sell or exchange them through a published process, use the proceeds to cover the cost of managing both structures, and direct any excess toward reducing the national debt. Non-Bitcoin assets obtained through forks or airdrops would generally be held for one year before disposal could be considered.

The bill's findings cite Bitcoin's finite supply as part of the case for treating it differently from other digital assets. Coindoo's guide to the Bitcoin halving explains how declining issuance moves the network toward its fixed limit of 21 million BTC.

The Acquisition Section Orders a Study, Not a Buying Program

The substitute would direct the Treasury and Commerce departments to study additional Bitcoin acquisitions within 180 days of enactment. They would examine the costs, risks, and potential benefits of lawful methods that would not create a net cost for taxpayers.

Possible methods include receiving Bitcoin through forfeitures and settlements, working with states or private entities, and using non-Bitcoin assets from the government stockpile. Directing officials to study those routes would not authorize Treasury to use them.

The text contains no one-million-BTC target and no instruction to buy Bitcoin on an exchange. It also states that the study cannot be treated as authority for new taxes, deficit spending, government borrowing, or using public assets as collateral. Any acquisition program would need separate legal authority.

Annual Proof of Reserve Would Have to Demonstrate Key Control

Treasury would establish a public cryptographic proof-of-reserve system covering the government's Bitcoin holdings, transactions, and control of the relevant private keys, extending a transparency practice that cryptocurrency exchanges widely adopted after the 2022 collapse of FTX. An independent auditor with cryptographic expertise would verify the annual report, while the Comptroller General, who heads the Government Accountability Office, Congress's audit arm, would oversee compliance.

The reporting frequency is one detail to watch. The introduced version of H.R. 8957 required quarterly reports, but the substitute prepared for the markup changes that requirement to annual reporting.

A Committee Win Would Still Leave the Bill Far From Enactment

If the Financial Services Committee reports H.R. 8957 favorably, the measure could proceed to the House floor. It would still need approval from the full House, passage through the Senate, and the president's signature. The two chambers would also need to resolve any differences between their versions.

The Senate's recent procedural vote on the CLARITY Act, a digital asset market-structure bill, illustrates the difference between advancing legislation and approving it. That vote stopped the CLARITY Act from moving forward without deciding every provision on its merits. H.R. 8957 is at an earlier stage: its first full committee consideration.

Five Points to Monitor as the Committee Edits the Bill

1. Whether the committee adopts the proposed substitute.
2. Whether the 20-year holding period remains intact.
3. Whether an amendment adds purchase authority beyond the study.
4. Whether lawmakers restore the original quarterly reporting schedule.
5. Whether the committee sends the bill to the full House.

If the committee reports H.R. 8957 favorably, the reserve would move one step closer to receiving statutory protection. The next test would be whether its 20-year holding rule, acquisition limits, and disclosure requirements can survive votes in both chambers.

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or investment advice. The proposed substitute may be amended during the committee markup.