Chancellor Rachel Reeves is facing mounting criticism over reports that the Treasury is considering a swift sale of the UK’s seized Bitcoin holdings—potentially worth over £5 billion at current valuations—in a bid to plug a £20 billion fiscal gap.
The 61,000 Bitcoin, confiscated as part of a 2018 fraud case, could deliver a short-term windfall for the Exchequer. But financial experts are warning that a hasty sale could become another chapter in the government’s long history of poorly timed asset disposals.
Nigel Green, chief executive of global financial advisory group deVere, has likened the move to Gordon Brown’s infamous gold sell-off in the late 1990s—when the UK offloaded bullion at historically low prices, only to see the value surge in the years that followed.
“Turning these assets into instant cash is tempting, but it risks repeating historical errors,” Green said. “They sold gold in a dip, only to regret it years later. We risk replaying that error with Bitcoin.”
Bitcoin recently surged past $118,000—just shy of its all-time high—and its rising profile among institutional investors has bolstered arguments that the digital asset should be treated less as a speculative play and more as a long-term strategic reserve.
“If countries like the US, the world’s largest economy, are seriously weighing Bitcoin as a reserve, why would the UK liquidate instead?” Green questioned.
His concerns come as the UK government steps up its push to position the country as a global fintech leader. In June, the Financial Conduct Authority lifted the ban on crypto-linked exchange traded notes (ETNs) for retail investors, marking a notable policy shift toward digital assets.
Yet selling off confiscated Bitcoin now, in the name of fiscal relief, could send mixed signals. “If we advocate crypto as strategic, then hastily disposing of seized Bitcoin is hypocritical—and harmful,” Green added.
Beyond the strategic optics, the economics of the sale may be less attractive than headline figures suggest. Green warns that legal fees, victim restitution, law enforcement deductions and administrative overheads could reduce net proceeds to as little as 20–30 per cent of the gross sale value.
“This isn’t free money,” he said. “Court battles and admin costs will eat into what the Treasury actually sees.”
For Green, the smarter move would be to take a page from sovereign wealth playbooks and treat Bitcoin as digital gold—scarce, decentralised, and potentially a hedge against long-term inflation.
“Emergency fiscal relief is not always best served by fire-sale tactics,” he said. “We need to act less on timing and more on trajectory. Liquidating now may offer temporary relief but does little to serve a future-facing economic strategy.”
In short, Green argues that how the UK handles its crypto reserves could define not just the Chancellor’s credibility, but the country’s broader standing in global finance. “Is the UK a digital finance pioneer—or panic merchants liquidating seized assets? The choice will help define Rachel Reeves’ and the government’s economic legacy.”
With global economies increasingly weighing how to integrate digital assets into their financial systems, the UK’s next move could either affirm its leadership—or undermine it.