U.S. Vice President JD Vance has placed Bitcoin inside a wider national strategy debate, arguing that Washington should view the asset through an economic and geopolitical lens. His remarks, resurfaced in a July 5 post by Trending Bitcoin, came from his Bitcoin 2025 address in Las Vegas.
Vance acknowledged that Bitcoin could become strategically important for the United States over the next decade. He tied that view to China’s long-running hostility toward crypto, saying Washington should ask why Beijing opposes the asset so strongly.
Vance Links Bitcoin Strategy to China’s Crypto Ban
During the speech, JD Vance argued that America should consider moving in the opposite direction of its chief geopolitical rival. He said that if the People’s Republic of China dislikes Bitcoin, then the U.S. should think seriously about “leaning into” it.
The argument reflects a broader policy shift under President Donald Trump. In March, Trump signed an executive order creating a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and a separate U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile.
According to the White House order, the reserve will use Bitcoin already held by the federal government, primarily assets seized through criminal or civil forfeiture cases. The order also says government-held BTC placed in the reserve “shall not be sold.” Instead, it will be maintained as a reserve asset.
China remains central to the contrast. Beijing banned crypto trading and mining in 2021, while also blocking financial institutions from supporting crypto transactions. Regulators also said virtual currencies could not circulate as money.
However, reports later showed that mining activity had quietly returned. According to Hashrate Index data, China accounted for about 14% of global Bitcoin mining activity in October 2025, suggesting that some operations continued even as the official ban remained in place.
Peter Schiff Challenges The U.S. Bitcoin Reserve Argument
Vance’s remarks quickly drew criticism from longtime Bitcoin skeptic Peter Schiff. In a July 5 post on X, Schiff questioned whether America should commit resources to an asset he considers worthless.
“So just because the Chinese are smart enough to realize Bitcoin is worthless we should be dumb enough to waste our resources on it?” Schiff wrote on X, directly challenging Vance’s strategic Bitcoin argument.
His response matched his broader argument that Bitcoin lacks intrinsic value. Schiff has repeatedly compared it unfavorably with gold, which he says has monetary and industrial utility.
Overall, the exchange exposed a widening policy divide. Supporters see digital scarcity as a reserve-strength asset, while critics view national adoption as a costly misuse of public resources.
Related: Why Are Public Companies Racing to Accumulate Bitcoin in Their Balance Sheets?