European Central Bank May Reconsider Ties With National Banks That Add Bitcoin to Reserves: ECB Board Member

The European Central Bank (ECB) may reconsider its relationship with any European national bank that adds Bitcoin to its reserves, according to ECB board member Piero Cipollone.

The European Central Bank (ECB) may reconsider its relationship with any European national bank that adds Bitcoin to its reserves, according to ECB board member Piero Cipollone.

In a Feb. 6 interview, Cipollone suggested that if a national bank integrates Bitcoin into its holdings, the institution would need to assess the risks associated with its repurchase agreements (repo) and swap lines.

He noted that the ECB would determine whether to maintain ties with such banks after conducting this evaluation. According to him:

“We would need to do a risk management assessment of that. Let’s see if any central bank enters this space because I don’t fully see the rationale for it. We will assess it at that point in time, if it happens.”

Cipollone reiterated his skepticism about Bitcoin’s role as a reserve asset. He emphasized that BTC lacks intrinsic value and suggested that its primary appeal comes from speculation on price appreciation.

According to him, investing in BTC relies on the belief that its price will continuously rise, as the asset has no underlying value, backing, or earning model.

He stated:

“I am trying to be rational and think about why I should invest in bitcoin or another crypto-asset. The only rationale is if one thinks that the price will always go up. It doesn’t have any underlying value, there is no asset backing it, there is no earning model.”

Cipollone’s comment follows recent developments in the Czech National Bank (CNB), which is evaluating the potential inclusion of Bitcoin in its reserve assets. However, ECB President Christine Lagarde has expressed confidence that the CNB and other major European central banks are unlikely to approve BTC as a reserve asset.

Bitcoin vs Gold

Cipollone also dismissed comparisons between Bitcoin and gold, arguing that the two assets differ in market structure, transparency, and adoption.

While BTC shares some characteristics with gold, such as scarcity and a perceived store of value, he believes the comparison is flawed.

He said:

“I would be careful about making the analogy. I don’t know how deep the market for gold is, but there are central banks in that market, and not just because of a legacy system. We should not stop at a superficial analogy between gold and bitcoin.”

Cipollone further pointed out that gold benefits from historical significance and established commercial and industrial use, unlike BTC, which does not share these attributes.

He remarked:

“[Central banks invest in gold] in part due to legacy, but gold has intrinsic, commercial and industrial value. Bitcoin does not have any of that.”

He also argued that Bitcoin and gold are impractical for everyday transactions compared to fiat currencies, which facilitate payments and provide relative stability.