[cwillu]

“Another change makes using bitcoin entirely voluntary. (Previously, the law mandated that businesses accept bitcoin for any goods or services they provided.) Additionally, bitcoin can no longer be used to pay taxes or settle government debts.”

--https://reason.com/2025/02/03/el-salvador-walks-back-its-bit...

Sounds pretty failed to me.

[desumeku]

They did this to receive a loan from the IMF. The IMF was withholding the loan because of BTC and would not disburse it until they got rid of its status as legal tender.

[Mengkudulangsat]

Fair demand by the IMF.

Presumably they require their loan to be repaid in fiat because of their internal charter. If Bitcoin adoption eventually removes El Salvador's ability to issue fiat, their loan can't be repaid.

[bawolff]

That's not really how that works. IMF can demand their loan be repaid in whatever currency they want. Its totally normal for international loans to be denominated in a currency other than the recipient's legal tender, particularly for high risk countries (although that is usually bad for the recipient)

[chrisco255]

In particular El Salvador doesn't even have its own legal tender and haven't for a long time. They use the US dollar.

[throwaway314155]

They don't want Bitcoin in exchange. Seems entirely reasonable to me given how much the value of cryptocurrency fluctuates with low predictability. They could get paid in it one day and lose half the value the next.

[bboygravity]

Fiat currencies also can and have lost half their value plenty of times.

Actually I can't think of any fiat currency that hasn't at least halved in value?

[graemep]

Usually over a long time. They are a lot less volatile than Bitcoin.

You can also offset the risks of sudden devaluation through matching assets and liabilities, trading derivatives and so on.

[ty6853]

This is why otc tradfi crypto futures are needed. You can buy a train car full of corn a year out trivially on a liquid futures market, regardless if corn prices fluctuate wildly you will pay what was agreed. Listing BTC derivatives would solve the predictability for fixed loan terms.

[do_not_redeem]

El Salvador can't issue fiat. They use US dollars. Only the US Federal Reserve can issue USD.

[kragen]

They could. Ecuador does in fact mint its own US-dollar coins, and El Salvador could dedollarize.

[favorited]

Ecuador mints their own centavo coins, but they are not legal tender outside of Ecuador. They've never released their own $1 coin into general circulation – their ubiquitous Sacagawea dollars are minted in the US.

[kragen]

Sorry, I didn't mean to say they minted US$1 coins, just coins whose value is denominated in dollars. I think the biggest one is US$0.25?

US dollars are also not legal tender outside the US, with a few exceptions (I think including both El Salvador and Ecuador.)

[hackernudes]

El Salvador doesn't have a fiat currency. They are dollarized since 2001.

[Mengkudulangsat]

Hmm.. I didn't know that. Which makes the demand purely political then. I recall IMF making the same demand from an island country a few years ago too.

https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2021/07/26/blog-crypto...

[mattnewton]

The IMF feels bitcoin is a risky asset and doesn’t want to be a part of that gamble when making its loan. The IMF has a history of making lots of conditions they feel minimize risk.

To me it looks more like my bank mandating I carry certain kinds of insurance in the terms of my mortgage than a political bias, but I am not an expert.

[iforgot22]

"urged officials to limit its exposure" is what the Reuters article said, so yeah. They think El Salvador's ability to repay the loan is tied too much to BTC.

[xenihn]

El Salvador hasn't issued fiat since 2001. Any other presumptions as to why its a fair demand?

[kragen]

The IMF will definitely not accept repayment in El Salvador's own fiat currency! That would be obviously stupid of them.

[Paradigma11]

Especially since it doesn't have one.

[kragen]

It could certainly create one. It has in the past.

[jimkleiber]

How many people in the Bitcoin community actually think a predictably deflationary asset is good to use as a currency?

[ball_of_lint]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

I'd much prefer a small amount of deflation to the massive inflation that USD is currently undergoing. And furthermore I think our economic system which encourages young people to take on debt in order to have niceties such as housing and transportation is massively exploitative and unsustainable.

[graemep]

High inflation discourages high debt.

High inflation effectively front loaded loans that had fixed repayments (such as mortgage repayments) and the high interest rates that went with them (they move togeter - its called the Fisher Effect - https://moneyterms.co.uk/fisher-effect/ ) meant lenders were willing to lend a much lower multiple or income.

In most places (and definitely in the UK) house prices were much lower relative to incomes when we had 10% annual inflation.

[consp]

> And furthermore I think our economic system which encourages young people to take on debt in order to have niceties such as housing and transportation is massively exploitative and unsustainable.

Deflation will kill that. Your loan will cost more over time instead of less. The assumption with inflation is loans will follow it. With deflation and loans not following then people who bought into the system might be well off but those who are not yet in are worse. Same thing with inflation and loans not following as is happening now.

[jimkleiber]

From my (maybe naive) understanding of current economic theory, it's that a small amount of inflation is what grows an economy. And an important part of that is unpredictable levels of inflation/deflation.

So I'd assume a small amount of predictable deflation would shrink an economy.

Anyone know more about this?

[kjs3]

'Withholding'...well how dare they.

So how many IMF bailout loans must be dispersed, without condition of course, before this BTC economy will magically work?

[daedrdev]

The IMF probably rightfully sees a structurally deflationary currency (bitcoin) as a massive risk should it gain widespread adoption

[throw101010]

It is structurally disinflationary, not just deflationary. Bitcoin is still emitted every ~10 minutes with currently an average inflation rate just under 1% of its supply per year.

The "massive risk" the IMF sees is that without central banks or even less influential central banks the IMF existence would be threatened.

[daedrdev]

If an economy grows at 2% and the supply grows by 1% it is in permanent deflation. For a country like el salvador with much higher growth, the deflation can easily be much higher

[throw101010]

You were discussing "structural" inflation, referring to Bitcoin as a system, not relative to inflation of goods and services in a specific economy. These are two distinct economic phenomena that can influence each other but should not be conflated.

Bitcoin's supply doesn't become inflationary or deflationary "structurally" based on the growth of x or y economies. The word inflation is used for both concepts but, structurally, Bitcoin will remain an inflationary system until around year 2140... then block subsidies are going to to stop, no new bitcoins are going to be emitted and then you (or more likely our descendants) can call Bitcoin a structurally deflationary money. Hence the use of the word disinflationary, it currently is in the process of becoming a deflationary system by progressively reducing the inflation of its own money supply (through "halvings" approx. every 4 years).

[Analemma_]

If the Bitcoin experiment had been a success, they wouldn't be needing an IMF loan.

[olalonde]

They also use USD as legal tender. Is their USD experiment a failure too?

[kjs3]

It's a failed economy with both BTC and USD, so...yes? I'm sure they would accept a BTC denominated bailout. Problem solved, right?

[127]

Not mandating businesses to accept Bitcoin is a more free market solution.