A recent report published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) casts doubt on El Salvador’s much-publicized Bitcoin 
$77,420 procurement strategy. Despite President Nayib Bukele’s assertions of continuous Bitcoin acquisitions since November 2022, the official document specifies that no new Bitcoin purchases were made since the IMF financing agreement took effect in February. This revelation puts a spotlight on the variance between government declarations and actual holdings submitted to the IMF for monitoring.
IMF Audit Reveals Inactivity
Under the terms of the IMF agreement, which initiated in February 2025 and secured a $1.4 billion loan, the report clarifies that Bitcoin purchases were to be curtailed. It becomes evident through a footnote in the report that the increased holdings in the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Fund stem not from direct acquisitions but from consolidation of assets across several government wallets. This audit position challenges the perspective of genuine expansion in holdings.
The IMF-maintained addresses opened for audit purposes show alignment with agreed conditions, thus reinterpreting reported growth as technical transfers rather than new purchases. The report’s language refrains from confirming new investments, tying the movements to existing recorded balances only.
Discrepancy with Bukele’s Statements
President Bukele has continually suggested the commitment to Bitcoin acquisition wouldn’t wane, emphasizing resilience against global exclusion. The Bitcoin Office claimed ownership of around 6,242 BTC, valuing approximately at $737 million. Despite these declarations, Arkham data suggests observed daily Bitcoin transfers from wallets tagged as major exchanges like Binance and Bitfinex, potentially misleading as per the IMF footnote. These transactions appear to be reallocations to the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve rather than fresh buys.
Stacy Herbert, leading the Bitcoin Office, has debated that some trust El Salvador’s Blockchain accumulation records over the IMF’s words, maintaining the official line. The juxtaposition of consolidation and daily purchase claims intensifies the ambiguity, without definitive records authenticating new acquisitions. The clear discrepancy remains at the explanation level between official statements and verifiable IMF reports.
