South Carolina’s Bitcoin Reserve Bill Plans to Invest 10% of State Funds

Representative Jordan Pace introduced legislation to create a Bitcoin Reserve for South Carolina, joining a nationwide effort. Currently, nearly half of all US states have an active bill to create a similar Reserve.

However, the talking point that this bill “allows 10% of state funds” in Bitcoin investments is taking off like wildfire. It may scare off fiscal conservatives, which contributed to recent failures.

South Carolina Joins the Bitcoin Reserve Race

Since President Trump announced his intention to create a US Bitcoin Reserve, many state governments have attempted to create smaller models.

In the last month, these efforts have been intensifying, with more and more states joining the effort. Today, South Carolina filed its own Bitcoin Reserve bill, allowing the state to make substantial purchases:

“The State Treasurer may invest in digital assets including, but not limited to, Bitcoin with money that is unexpended, unencumbered, or uncommitted. The amount of money that the State Treasurer may invest in digital assets from a fund specified in this section may not exceed ten precent of the total funds under management,” it reads.

State Representative Jordan Pace proposed South Carolina’s Bitcoin Reserve legislation. He claimed that this bill “gives the Treasurer new tools to protect taxpayer dollars from inflation,” one of crypto’s most well-known use cases. Pace is currently the bill’s only sponsor, and it’s unclear what chances it has of passing.

Still, there may be challenges ahead. Similar proposals in other Republican-led states—like Montana and Wyoming—have already failed. This was largely due to concerns over using public funds to buy cryptocurrency.

Even though Trump backs the idea on a national level, not all GOP lawmakers are convinced at the state level.

That said, there are some signs of progress elsewhere. For example, Texas has advanced its Bitcoin Reserve bill, achieving bipartisan support. A key reason for its success is that the bill doesn’t require the state to make crypto purchases; it simply allows them at the Treasurer’s discretion.

Likewise, South Carolina’s bill wouldn’t force the state to invest 10% of its funds into Bitcoin. It just opens the door for that possibility, giving the state financial flexibility rather than a mandate.