The dramatic rise of Bitcoin's value has captured global attention, with its price surpassing that of gold per ounce in March and continuing to climb to new heights. This surge has sparked intense debate within financial circles, leading many to question how regulatory bodies, particularly central banks, should respond to the growing influence of cryptocurrencies.
Despite calls for strict prohibitions, the People's Bank of China (PBOC) has notably refrained from outright banning Bitcoin. After imposing temporary restrictions on Bitcoin withdrawals earlier in the year, the central bank later eased these controls. This approach suggests a cautious yet open regulatory stance. Understanding why requires a closer look at Bitcoin's economic impact and its classification under current financial systems.
Bitcoin is not recognized as legal tender in China or most other countries. Instead, it is treated as a virtual commodity. This distinction is crucial—it means Bitcoin does not possess the same法定 status as sovereign currencies and therefore does not directly threaten the existing monetary system. From the perspective of central banking authorities, there are three key reasons why an outright ban is deemed unnecessary.
Bitcoin’s Limited Impact on Exchange Rates
Despite Bitcoin’s significant volatility—with fluctuations sometimes exceeding 30% within short periods—the renminbi (RMB) exchange rate against major global currencies has remained relatively stable. For instance, during periods when Bitcoin experienced sharp declines or surges, the RMB showed no correlated extreme movements.
Since Bitcoin is not classified as a currency in China, its valuation in RMB terms is akin to the pricing of any other traded commodity. There is no direct foreign exchange market between RMB and Bitcoin. Price changes in Bitcoin reflect shifts in demand and supply for the asset itself, not the strength or weakness of the RMB. This is comparable to how global commodities like oil are priced in local currencies worldwide—variations do not dictate exchange rate movements.
No Significant Effect on Foreign Exchange Reserves
When individuals in China purchase Bitcoin using RMB, the transaction represents a transfer of ownership of domestic currency. The seller receives RMB in exchange for transferring Bitcoin ownership, but this does not automatically lead to the conversion of RMB into foreign currencies such as the US dollar.
Therefore, Bitcoin trading does not directly impact China’s foreign exchange reserves. These reserves have remained stable at around $3 trillion, even as Bitcoin prices soared. Historical data further supports this: during periods when forex reserves grew rapidly, Bitcoin’s price was highly volatile and uncorrelated. Existing capital control policies ensure that converting RMB from Bitcoin sales into foreign currency still requires compliance with regulatory guidelines.
Minimal Influence on Monetary Policy
Bitcoin has been operational since 2009, with Chinese participants actively involved for years. However, the country’s monetary policy mechanisms have remained unchanged. The PBOC continues to use interest rates and open market operations as primary tools without adjusting them due to Bitcoin's presence.
Macroeconomic indicators, such as CPI inflation and overall financial stability, have not been significantly disrupted. This is because trading Bitcoin in domestic markets only alters ownership structures of existing RMB funds rather than increasing money supply or creating new monetary pressures. If Bitcoin were capable of influencing monetary policy, then any widely traded commodity could claim the same effect—a notion lacking theoretical and empirical support.
👉 Explore advanced cryptocurrency frameworks
The Risks of Recognizing Bitcoin as Currency
It is important to emphasize that the current regulatory tolerance hinges on Bitcoin’s status as a commodity rather than a currency. Should official recognition change—if Bitcoin were to be classified as legal tender—the situation would shift dramatically. As a competing currency, Bitcoin could challenge sovereign monetary systems, necessitating stricter oversight to prevent potential macroeconomic instability.
In such a scenario, central banks would need to develop new tools to manage volatility, capital flows, and financial sovereignty risks. For now, however, treating Bitcoin as just one of many tradeable assets allows regulators to avoid premature intervention while monitoring its evolution.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why hasn’t China banned Bitcoin?
China classifies Bitcoin as a virtual commodity rather than a currency, limiting its potential impact on the financial system. Without significant influence on exchange rates, forex reserves, or monetary policy, there is no urgent need for a ban.
Does Bitcoin trading affect the RMB exchange rate?
No. Because Bitcoin is not recognized as a currency, its RMB-denominated price is separate from the foreign exchange market. Fluctuations in Bitcoin’s value do not directly impact the value of the renminbi.
Can Bitcoin purchases reduce China’s foreign exchange reserves?
Not directly. Buying Bitcoin with RMB does not automatically convert RMB into foreign currency. Sellers receiving RMB must still comply with existing capital control regulations to exchange it for foreign funds.
What would happen if Bitcoin were recognized as legal tender?
Official recognition would place Bitcoin in direct competition with sovereign currencies. This could compromise monetary policy effectiveness and necessitate proactive regulatory measures to maintain financial stability.
How does the PBOC view other cryptocurrencies?
The same commodity-based logic applies to most cryptocurrencies. As long as they do not threaten monetary sovereignty or systemic stability, the central bank adopts a cautious observational stance.
Should investors be concerned about future Bitcoin regulations?
While not currently prohibited, Bitcoin remains subject to existing financial laws. Investors should stay informed about regulatory updates and avoid activities that violate capital controls or securities regulations.