U.S. lawmakers moved a step closer to turning President Donald Trump’s proposal for a strategic Bitcoin reserve into law after the American Reserve Modernization Act of 2026 (H.R. 8957) cleared the House Committee on Financial Services on Wednesday.

The committee approved the bill in a 28–21 vote, setting up the next phase of legislative review in the full House and, later, the Senate. If enacted, the measure would create a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and a separate Digital Asset Stockpile inside the Department of the Treasury to hold federally forfeited Bitcoin and other digital assets.

Key takeaways

The American Reserve Modernization Act of 2026 (H.R. 8957) advanced after a 28–21 vote in the House Financial Services Committee.
It would establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve for Bitcoin held by the federal government for at least 20 years.
The proposal aims to improve oversight via agency-wide asset accounting, quarterly “proof of reserve” reporting, and third-party audits.
It would also commission a study on budget-neutral strategies for expanding the reserve and allow states to store their Bitcoin with the Federal Reserve.
The bill explicitly affirms private Bitcoin ownership and the importance of self-custody and private key control.

From executive idea to draft legislation

The bill, introduced by Representative Nicholas Begich on May 21, is designed to address what supporters describe as fragmented and inconsistent custody practices for Bitcoin currently held under federal authority. Begich argued that allowing federal Bitcoin holdings to remain scattered across custody arrangements creates unacceptable cybersecurity risks and undermines accurate accounting of what the government actually owns.

In his view, the legislation would help make Bitcoin a durable part of U.S. reserve policy—while providing a clearer framework for how those assets are stored, reported, and secured.

What the bill would create at Treasury

According to the bill text described in coverage, H.R. 8957 would establish two related structures inside the Department of the Treasury:

A Strategic Bitcoin Reserve for federally held Bitcoin; and
A Digital Asset Stockpile for other digital assets acquired through criminal or civil forfeiture.

The proposal also sets a minimum holding period: Bitcoin placed in the federal reserve would have to remain there for at least 20 years. That requirement indicates the act is not being framed as a short-term treasury maneuver, but as a long-duration policy shift.

For investors and market participants, the key point is less about immediate market effects and more about the administrative pathway: if H.R. 8957 becomes law, it would standardize federal custody and governance around digital assets acquired through forfeiture—potentially reducing uncertainty about how such holdings are managed over time.

Transparency and audits built into the framework

The act would also require federal agencies to provide a comprehensive accounting of digital assets they currently hold or control. It further introduces transparency mechanisms that include:

Quarterly “proof of reserve” reports; and
Third-party audits.

Supporters appear to see these provisions as a direct response to custody and reporting gaps. By mandating recurring disclosures and independent verification, the bill attempts to make the reserve more measurable and harder to obscure through fragmented reporting.

Some context for why this matters: the U.S. government is estimated to hold 324,527 Bitcoin, worth $24.7 billion at the time of writing, according to Arkham Intelligence. While estimates can vary by methodology, the broad takeaway is that the federal government’s on-chain footprint is large enough that custody and reporting practices can become politically and operationally consequential.

Custody rules, self-custody rights, and what still needs to happen

Beyond reserve creation and transparency requirements, H.R. 8957 would direct a study of budget-neutral acquisition strategies for expanding the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. The bill would also affirm that states could store their Bitcoin in the Federal Reserve.

Just as notably, the legislation would explicitly recognize private ownership and self-custody rights of Bitcoin, describing control of private keys as fundamental to “financial sovereignty, privacy, and personal liberty in the digital age.” That language is likely intended to address concerns that any federal Bitcoin framework could be interpreted as limiting individual control over assets.

Bitcoin Policy Institute executive director Connor Brown described the committee vote as a “genuinely historic step for Bitcoin policy,” while Strive CEO Matt Cole previously called the measure “the single most important crypto legislation that can come out of DC.”

However, the committee approval is only an intermediate milestone. The bill still has to pass the full U.S. House and then the Senate before it can reach President Trump for a final decision.

As lawmakers consider the next stages, readers should watch two things closely: whether the reserve and audit requirements survive amendments in the full House and Senate, and how negotiators balance federal reserve objectives with the bill’s explicit protections for private self-custody and key ownership.