These legislative initiatives can’t influence the market. The main reason is that cryptocurrency pricing directly depends on the ability and willingness of large players to swing the rate with borrowed capital, rather than any political decisions of this nature. Besides, the very idea doesn’t seem particularly interesting for big businesses, because contracts are usually concluded in a reliable, lowly volatile currency. Since late fall, BTC has had time to drop by 25% and then rise from its slump by 30%. Such fluctuations make it pretty much impossible to plan your business activities in any way. It’s not for nothing that the transfer of contracts even to regional national currencies is carried out with great difficulty.
Perhaps, we’re talking about fiat billing, followed by conversion into BTC and then back to fiat, but that also involves additional costs and risks. In any case, after SWIFT’s restrictions on transactions, the business found a working alternative. Therefore, it’s unlikely that we should expect a mass rush for crypto transactions. Fortunately, in spring, when the uncertainty level was high, not many people were interested in Bitcoin or stablecoins as an alternative payment gateway.
Forecasts for future market dynamics should also be based on the risk appetite in the market, which relies on the cost of funding speculation or, in other words, the Fed’s policies. Why mess with cryptocurrencies or even stocks, when corporate bonds give a solid yield of 6-10%? When the window of risk-free returns is closed, then we should wait for an influx of capital into high-risk instruments. Until then, Bitcoin may very well sink to $10,000.
(If you want to discuss the column’s topic with its author, Anton Bykov, Senior Analyst at Esperio, you can email the editorial team at media@coinspaid.com — ed.)
