After its attempts to convert Amazon and Microsoft, The National center for Public Policy Research is now coming for one of the biggest tech giants out there, Meta.

In both the proposal to Amazon and Microsoft, the think-tank has said that adopting Bitcoin into their treasuries would protect cash assets and shareholder value from inflation.

But just like many of the other tech companies out there, Meta is saying no to the think-tank's proposal as this might harbour too much of a risk for the company in the long run.

So why is it that all these companies are so reluctant to convert to Bitcoin, and what are they losing out by taking the conservative route when it comes to crypto-related policies?

Proposal to Meta

The National Center for Public Policy has just submitted a proposal requesting that social media company, Meta, to convert a portion of its $72 billion in cash and short-term cash equivalents to Bitcoin as a hedge against currency debasement.

Ethan Peck, an employee of the think-tank, purports that the tech company is losing 28% of its cash assets over time due to factors such as inflation and data of how Bitcoin has reaped a 1.262% better monetary returns for companies compared to bonds over the past five years as a hard evidence for the company to consider its proposal.

In his proposal, Peck also wrote

"Mark Zuckerberg named his goats Bitcoin and Max. Meta director Marc Andreessen has praised Bitcoin adn is also a director at Coinbase. Do Meta shareholders not deserve the same kind of responsible asset allocation for the Company that Meta directors and executives likely implement for themselves."

Big Tech's saying no to Bitcoin because too much is on the line

But based on the responses of Amazon and Microsoft, we can mostly guess what Meta's answer is.

Back in an internet meeting on the 10 December, Microsoft shareholders voted against the proposal of allocating at least 1% of its $484 billion assets to Bitcoin. This proposal was recommended to Microsoft by the think-tank as well.

Just one day before the decision was made, the Think-tank struck Amazon with the same Bitcoin corporate treasury diversification strategy proposal to Amazon shareholders.

In the proposal, the organization claimed that the true inflation rate the country is experiencing right now is actually twice of what was recorded as the Consumer Price Index (CPI)-a measure of inflation based on baskets of household goods.

The organisation has also, on many occasions, criticized the measure (CPI) as a remarkably poor measure of true currency debasement.

But many big tech companies are hesitating to adopt Bitcoin due to their size and positions of strength as industry leaders in a highly profitable sector. While Bitcoin does offer a potential hedge, do the risks really outweigh the benefits?

Despite the support of business intelligence firm MircroStrategy, Microsoft shareholders have still voted "no" to the bitcoin reserve proposal from the think-tank.Then what about Amazon; would the company be open to the proposal?

Might Amazon take a different route than Microsoft?

While Microsoft and Amazon are both tech giants, but both companies differ greatly in their styles. While Microsoft has always been historically conservative in its fiscal and strategic approach, Amazon has a track record of adopting emerging technologies and exploring novel investments.

Amazon would most likely be voting on this proposal on its annual shareholders meeting in May 2025. The proposal urges the company to allocate at least 5% of its assets in Bitcoin, which is a very risky proposal given how the typical allocation to risky assets is often set to a mere 1-2% to minimize risk for the company.

Many are saying that allocating such a high percentage of its asset might be overly ambitious and risky for a company of Amazon's scale. While Bitcoin does bring about diversification, its volatility and lack of tangible yield might make it challenging to justify for a company with the scale of Amazon.

Many are also saying Amazon should instead take smaller steps and start with a smaller experimental allocation, as it would be more palatable for the shareholders.

Does Bitcoin allocation really work for all tech giants?

One of the success stories of Bitcoin is the story of company Microstrategy. After adopting Bitcoin into its treasury in 2020, the company has managed to reap a total profit of more than $250 million from its Bitcoin purchase.

If Bitcoin fared so well for such a small company like Microstrategy, then why won't other tech companies also adopt the same treasury model?

Today, Amazon has a market cap of $2.4 trillion, and such a strong core business means that there is on rush for the company to adopt Bitcoin. While the strategy might help Amazon help the company to fight against inflation, the money taken out to invest in Bitcoin could also be perceived as a liability for its profitable business model.

The portion of money taken out to invest in Bitcoin could mean that it could impact Amazon's ability to fund key growth areas such as AWS, AI advancement, and logistical infrastructures. Hence, shareholders would have to consider both innovation and retaining the company's competitive edge when its making its decision whether to adopt Bitcoin into its treasury strategy.

Big Tech’s Hesitance to Embrace Bitcoin

Big Tech firms have largely resisted adding Bitcoin to their corporate treasuries. For instance, Microsoft shareholders voted against a proposal in December 2024 recommending that at least 1% of the company’s $484 billion in assets be allocated to Bitcoin.

The National Center for Public Policy Research has also submitted a Bitcoin diversification proposal to Amazon shareholders, to be reviewed during the company’s April 2025 meeting. The proposal criticizes traditional inflation metrics like the Consumer Price Index (CPI), arguing that actual inflation rates are likely double the CPI’s reported figures.

Challenges to Bitcoin Adoption

Nick Cowan, CEO of fintech firm Valereum, explained that Big Tech’s reluctance stems from the volatility of Bitcoin and its lack of native yield-generating options. Companies with strong financial positions and consistent profitability are less inclined to take on the risks associated with Bitcoin, particularly for allocations exceeding 5% of their treasury.

Despite these challenges, Peck’s proposal and similar initiatives highlight growing interest in Bitcoin as an alternative treasury asset, especially in an era of rising inflation and economic uncertainty. Whether Meta and other Big Tech firms will reconsider their stance on digital assets remains to be seen.

Another factor big tech firms would have to consider is the public's perspective of Bitcoin, which has been tarnished by potential misuse and environmental concerns. Given how Amazon has always pride itself in sustainability efforts, taking on Bitcoin could also be a slap on its own face.

Bitcoin's high energy usage in mining has faced heavy criticism from environmentalists. While that narrative is shifting as mining infrastructure is more thoroughly examined, but risks of a PR backlash remain.

Amazon shareholders have a very difficult dilemma ahead of them: Do they take the risk and hope that Amazon could replicate the same success as Tesla or MicroStrategy by hedging against inflation with Bitcoin, or if its should avoid the risks and focus on its core business model?