Bukele says he buys 1 BTC per day, but the IMF reports no net increase in government-owned Bitcoin; blockchain transfers into disclosed wallets continue, likely reflecting internal reallocation or prior purchases rather than fresh open‑market buys.
-
Bukele claims daily purchases of 1 BTC into government wallets
-
IMF states total government-owned BTC has not increased since the 2024 agreement
-
Blockchain data shows daily deposits into El Salvador–linked wallets; timing and origin of funds remain ambiguous
Meta description: Bukele buys 1 BTC per day claim vs IMF denial—investigate blockchain transfers, government statements, and what the data actually shows. Read analysis now.
By COINOTAG — Published: 2025-09-12 • Updated: 2025-09-12
What is the true status of Nayib Bukele’s “1 BTC per day” claim?
Bukele buys 1 BTC per day is a public claim from El Salvador’s president that the government is adding one Bitcoin to its reserves each day. Blockchain transfers into government‑labelled wallets occur daily, but the IMF says total government‑owned BTC has not increased, suggesting transfers may reflect internal reallocations or previously acquired coins.
How does the IMF conclude there has been no net increase?
The IMF states the apparent increase in the Bitcoin Reserve Fund corresponds to movements across government wallets, not fresh net purchases. This assessment came as part of El Salvador’s development grant discussions and a 2024 agreement that required scaling back certain Bitcoin operations.
| Claim | Evidence | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Bukele: 1 BTC/day purchases and periodic larger buys | President’s tweets and government wallet deposits reported on-chain | Public announcements align with wallet inflows but not proof of open‑market purchases |
| IMF: No increase in government-owned Bitcoin | IMF communications citing internal wallet movements | Suggests reclassification or transfers of existing holdings rather than new buys |
| Blockchain analytics | Arkham, Bubblemaps tracking daily deposits from exchanges and other addresses | Shows deposits but cannot prove purchase time or exchange ledger details |
Why can blockchain data both support and fail to prove fresh purchases?
Public blockchain ledgers show wallet balances and transaction sources, but they do not reveal when a coin was originally acquired or whether an exchange moved existing custodial holdings. If government wallets receive coins routed from exchanges, that inflow might reflect transfers of previously purchased or tax‑collected BTC.
How have analysts and officials explained the discrepancy?
Risk analysts warn of possible “wash trades” or internal reallocation if purchases are not clearly documented with exchange ledgers. Crypto analytics firms (e.g., Arkham, Bubblemaps) say on‑chain data is transparent but insufficient to establish the timing of original purchases without exchange cooperation. The IMF communicated that total government holdings show no net increase.
“We can confirm that the total amount of government-owned Bitcoin has not increased and that the increase in the Bitcoin Reserve Fund corresponds to movements across government wallets,” IMF Communications Officer Meera Louis said.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is El Salvador actually buying 1 BTC every day?
Publicly disclosed government wallets show daily deposits consistent with roughly 1 BTC per day. However, the IMF reports no net increase in government-owned BTC, indicating those deposits could be internal transfers or coins previously acquired but only recently moved into transparent wallets.
How can I verify if BTC deposits are fresh purchases?
Verify on-chain inflows to government wallets and cross-check timestamps. Definitive proof requires exchange ledger data showing purchase timestamps—data only the exchange can provide. Public analytics can flag exchange-originated deposits but not the original acquisition date.
Key Takeaways
- On-chain deposits exist: Daily inflows into El Salvador government wallets support Bukele’s announcements in appearance.
- IMF reports no net increase: The IMF attributes reported increases to internal wallet movements, not new net purchases.
- Definitive proof requires exchange data: Exchange ledger records are needed to confirm whether deposits represent fresh open‑market buys.
Conclusion
Both claims contain verifiable elements: Bukele’s statements match visible wallet inflows, while the IMF’s assessment highlights that on‑chain transfers do not necessarily equal net new purchases. Independent verification hinges on exchange records and clearer government accounting. Readers should watch for transparent exchange disclosures or official ledger reconciliations for a conclusive answer.
