Bitcoin’s network just suffered a sudden shock, experiencing a sharp 10% drop in Bitcoin hashrate within 24 hours. But more surprisingly, experts are pointing their fingers at China, claiming it was China who has caused the sudden dip.

These allegations have once again reignited debate over Beijing’s lingering influence on the world’s largest blockchain, after a former top executive at mining hardware giant Canaan accused Chinese authorities of forcing hundreds of thousands of mining rigs offline in Xinjiang.

400,000 Mining Rigs Went Dark at Once

In a post on X, Jianping Kong, former co-chairman of Canaan, claimed Bitcoin’s hashrate plunged by roughly 100 terahashes per second (TH/s) between Sunday and Monday.

Data from YCharts shows Bitcoin’s estimated hashrate falling from approximately 1,053 TH/s to just under 943 TH/s, dipping more than 110 TH/s, or over 10%. However, these numbers are just as estimates as hashrate figures are often inferred from blockproduction data and cannot be precisely measured.

Based on the stats, Kong also estimated that at least 400,000 ASIC mining machines must have been shutdown based on how every rig is estimated to produce an output of 250 TH/s.

Kong also posits that the shutting down of the mining machines could have been concentrated in China's Xinjiang autonomous region, a place which was historically one of the country's most important bitcoin mining hubs due to its access to cheap electricity.

While the claims have not been independently verified, Kong’s senior role at one of the world’s largest ASIC manufacturers lends weight to his assertion.

The U.S. Pushes Ahead as China Stumbles

China’s relationship with Bitcoin mining has always been volatile. Prior to the 2021 nationwide crackdown, the country controlled an estimated 65% of global Bitcoin hashrate. That dominance collapsed almost overnight as miners fled to friendlier jurisdictions.

Yet mining activity never fully disappeared. By late 2024, data from the Hashrate Index suggested China still accounted for about 14% of global mining power, while CryptoQuant estimated the figure could be as high as 15–20%. Recent Reuters reporting has highlighted how miners continue exploiting cheap electricity in remote regions, often operating in legal gray areas.

Kong was blunt in his assessment of the latest shutdowns, stating that with Xinjiang mining farms offline, “the U.S. wins without lifting a finger.” The comment underscores his belief that China’s regulatory unpredictability is once again undermining its own influence over Bitcoin.

Kong’s allegations come at a time when the United States is aggressively expanding its domestic Bitcoin mining industry. In August, mining firm Hut 8 announced plans to develop four new mining facilities across Texas, Louisiana, and Illinois, adding a combined 1.5 gigawatts of capacity.

Hut 8’s subsidiary, American Bitcoin, has drawn attention for its political ties, with Eric Trump, son of U.S. President Donald Trump, sitting on its board. The move reflects a broader shift in Washington, where Bitcoin mining is increasingly viewed as strategic infrastructure rather than a fringe industry.

At the same time, U.S. authorities are tightening scrutiny on Chinese ASIC manufacturers, particularly Bitmain, amid national security concerns. Investigations are ongoing examining whether foreign-made mining hardware could be remotely manipulated or pose risks to critical power infrastructure.

Earlier this year, U.S. Customs and Border Protection temporarily blocked shipments of Bitmain ASICs following probes linked to Chinese chip designer Xiamen Sophgo and alleged ties to sanctioned telecom giant Huawei. Hardware imports only resumed after enhanced inspections in March 2025.

Is Kong’s Allegation Believable?

Here at Coinlive, we believe that Kong’s claim is certainly plausible—but it should be treated with cautious skepticism. A 10% hashrate drop in a single day is extreme and typically requires a coordinated or region-wide disruption, something Xinjiang shutdowns could realistically cause.

However, without independent confirmation or on-chain forensic analysis tying the drop directly to China, the allegation remains circumstantial. That said, China’s long history of sudden policy shifts and opaque enforcement makes Kong’s explanation far from far-fetched.

Whether intentional or not, the episode is yet another reminder that Bitcoin’s decentralization is still tested by real-world geopolitics—and that the balance of mining power continues to drift away from China and toward the United States.