According to ShibDaily, White House Crypto Czar David Sacks has dismissed proposals for a cryptocurrency transaction tax intended to fund the newly established U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. The proposal, which suggested a 0.01% tax on crypto transactions, has faced significant opposition from the crypto community, who argue that even a minimal tax could hinder adoption. Sacks expressed his concerns during an interview on the All-In Podcast, where host Jason Calacanis introduced the idea. Sacks warned that such a tax could set a precedent for future increases, potentially burdening the crypto industry. He likened the proposal to the historical expansion of income tax in the United States, which initially targeted a small group but eventually extended to the middle class.
In response to criticism, Calacanis defended his proposal on social media, suggesting that a small tax on crypto transactions could help legitimize and grow the industry. He compared it to existing taxes on property, hotels, and other goods, which typically range from 1% to 10%. Despite his arguments, the proposal has been met with backlash, with some critics likening it to being charged for withdrawing money from a personal bank account. They argue that such a policy could undermine the burgeoning crypto industry, which is gaining momentum under the current administration.
While the recent White House Crypto Summit did not address specific tax policies, U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has indicated support for broader federal tax reform. The announcement of the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve has led to notable market reactions, with cryptocurrency prices fluctuating in response. Following Sacks' announcement that President Trump had signed an executive order to establish the reserve, Senator Elizabeth Warren raised ethical concerns in a formal letter to the Crypto Czar. She questioned how Sacks would manage conflicts of interest and prevent the administration from profiting from its crypto policies. Warren criticized the administration's recent actions, warning that they could primarily benefit wealthy investors and insiders at the expense of middle-class families.
This article is intended for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial adviser before making any investment decisions.