What is the problem with cryptocurrency (bitcoin)? – Investors’ Corner

Bitcoin is not money

Theoretically and legally, cryptocurrencies such as bitcoinare not money despite what some people may think. Money serves three functions:it is a medium of exchange, a unit of account and a store of value.

Not many goods and services are priced in and settled by bitcoin (or other cryptocurrencies). Bitcoin is not universally accepted as a unit of account and a means of payment. Granted, many cryptocurrency payment apps have been created in recent years to promote its use. But none of them has made it to the core of the worlds daily transactions and payments [1], except for some underworld transactions.

Crucially, cryptos are priced in USD (or other fiatcurrencies). So they are no different from any item priced in USD standing onthe opposite side of money in a transaction. Veteran bitcoin investor MarkCuban summarised it succinctly when he said:

For cryptocurrency to be money, it (bitcoin) would have to be so easy to use its a no-brainer. It would have to be completely friction-free and understandable by everybody first. So easy, in fact, that grandma could do it.[2]

To legally qualify as money, a means of payment must begranted a status by a countrys laws as its official monetary unit. This legaltender status allows debtors to pay their obligations/liabilities bytransferring them to creditors as recognised and approved by law.

Recent research found that 80% of the worlds central banks were either not allowed to issue digital currency under the existing laws, or their legal frameworks are ambiguous and do not clearly permit them to do so [3]. China, however, passed a law in 2020 allowing its central bank to issue a digital currency [4], hence the birth of the worlds first official digital currency, the Digital Currency Electronic Payment (DCEP) [5]. Despite being digital, DCEP is strictly speaking not a cryptocurrency.

Legal tender status is usually given to means of paymentthat can be easily transferred and used by the population in daily life. To usebitcoin, or cryptocurrencies, a digital infrastructure including computers,smartphones, internet networks and connectivity must be in place. Thiscondition makes it unrealistic for cryptocurrencies to become money. It echoesMark Cubans argument against bitcoin as money.

Bitcoin supporters say it is an investible asset.Investible, yes (in the speculative sense, in my view). Asset, I am not sure.

There is an income stream associated with a financialasset. Granted, there are assets with a zero yield such as commodities, butthey are traded because they have a practical use (for production orconsumption). Cryptocurrencies have neither an income stream nor a practicaluse.

The fact that they command a price and are tradablesuggests that speculation would be their single most important raison dtre.Hence crypto prices are subject to violent and random movement. This brings upthe other problem, store of value.

For something to serve as a store of value, it has to beliquid, universally accepted, and have a stable value. Cryptocurrenciesincluding bitcoin certainly do not have any of these characteristics.

Bitcoin trading suffers from illiquidity and manipulationbecause of the existence of whale wallets (wallets holding disproportionatelylarge amounts of bitcoins).

In late 2020, the top 100 wallets were estimated to own13% of total bitcoin supply (6) with most of the owners identities not known.It would therefore only take a few whale wallets to manipulate the bitcoinmarket, causing violent price moves. Huge price volatility has made bitcoin andcryptocurrencies unsuitable as store of value vehicles.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom that the finite supplyof bitcoins and cryptos is a benefit and protects value, it is in fact a bigproblem for them being considered as money.

The maximum number of bitcoins that can ever be mined is21 million. At the time of writing, there are already 18.6 million bitcoins incirculation. The last bitcoin would be mined in 2040. All cryptocurrencies havea finite supply and the speed at which they can be increased is uncertain andnot controllable by anyone.

These supply limitations make cryptocurrencies unsuitableas legal tender because the static 'money supply' would deprive central banksof the ability to conduct countercyclical policy.

However, crypto promoters have capitalised on widespreadfear and distrust of fiat money arising from post-Global-Financial-Crisis (GFC)monetisation. They have skillfully twisted this supply problem into an argumentfor cryptocurrencies as a hedge against doomsday scenarios. I believe this iswrong.

China, which used to be the largest crypto mining country,has seen through the smoke and mirrors and has cracked down on trading andmining without reservation. This shows how quickly regulators could destroy thefreewheeling, decentralised crypto market. China instead has created anofficial DCEP with centralised control.

What crypto aficionados do not appear to understand isthat countries will take steps to protect their monetary systems and currenciesand their ability to tax and manage the economy. The more people believecryptocurrencies are money, the greater the risk of government intervention inthis market. The emerging trend of official digital currencies is a sign ofcentral banks fighting back.

The popular narrative that bitcoins finite supplyguarantees its value can play into concerns over central bank quantitativeeasing and what these QE programmes might mean for fiat money. Thus, the riseof cryptocurrencies can be seen as reflecting the anti-establishment movementsin many countries since the 2008 GFC.

Viewed positively, this 'crypto protest' could prompt governmentsto change their economic management to become more responsible and regain trustand credibility. Time will tell.

I believe crypto prices will eventually crash. This couldbe triggered by a shift in monetary policy or regulations. Alternatively, acrash could simply occur because prices are so inflated that much like theDutch tulip mania, marginal buyers are priced out of the market, leading to aself-feeding process of liquidation and falling prices when leveraged investorsstart to sell.