Switzerland Weighs Constitutional Move to Add Bitcoin to Reserves

Under Swiss law, there is also the possibility of citizens amending the constitution through the collection of 100,000 valid signatures within 18 months. The proposal is subsequently referred to a national referendum, subject to verification, where it will be required by both the popular majority and by a majority of cantons. The text at hand seeks to alter Article 99, which already obliges the SNB to hold some of its reserves in gold, by adding Bitcoin to the same provision.

Supporters of the initiative describe it as a natural evolution of Switzerland’s tradition of fiscal independence and innovation. They argue that as the global economy becomes increasingly digital, Bitcoin’s decentralized structure and finite supply offer long-term protection against fiat-currency debasement and inflationary pressures. For them, embedding Bitcoin in the constitution is a way to safeguard national reserves against external shocks and political manipulation.

Switzerland's global reputation as a fintech center solidifies the thrust of the movement. The "Crypto Valley" community centered on Zug already has made the country one of the globe's most advanced blockchain-friendly jurisdictions. Its banking culture, based on stability, neutrality, and precision, is well-suited to claims linking digital-asset reserves to the broader principle of financial sovereignty.

Unlike the European Union, which is pursuing a top-down regulatory framework through the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) legislation, Switzerland’s approach reflects a more market-driven and principle-based philosophy. While the EU focuses on harmonizing compliance standards across 27 member states, Switzerland continues to rely on its domestic legal clarity, flexible licensing regimes, and open dialogue between regulators and innovators. This distinction reinforces Switzerland’s position as a sovereign financial laboratory, able to experiment with Bitcoin at the constitutional level without being constrained by bloc-wide policymaking.

The proposal’s supporters also point to global economic shifts. As major economies face growing debt burdens and inflationary cycles, a number of governments are reconsidering the composition of their national reserves. In this environment, the idea of holding a portion in Bitcoin, often likened to “digital gold,” has gained ideological traction, even if practical adoption remains limited. Advocates contend that Switzerland, with its small but highly sophisticated economy, is ideally positioned to pioneer such a model responsibly.

Still. The Swiss National Bank is prudent. Being part of the central banking elite, SNB officials have always been keen to emphasize that their mandate has liquidity, price stability, and risk management as its priorities. From a technical point of view, Bitcoin's volatility, custodial issues, and ambiguous regulatory treatment pose obstacles that are not compatible with traditional reserve management. The SNB insists that any asset on its balance sheet should be stable, easily sellable, and usable in foreign-exchange operations, criteria that Bitcoin currently fails to satisfy.

This intersection of democratic fervor and institutional caution is what propels to the center of the dispute. On one side, there is a popular movement desperate for a redefinition of national wealth and power in an updated, digital world. On the other hand, there is a central-bank orthodoxy that views stability and knowability as the foundation of monetary policy. The resolution of this dispute may determine not only Switzerland's monetary system but the world's vision for Bitcoin as a state-level financial instrument.

Even if the initiative gets the signatures it needs, the political process will be challenging. Constitutional reforms in Switzerland require broad backing, and past referenda on monetary reform, such as the 2018 bid to vest the SNB with sole power of money creation, have been comprehensively rejected. The challenge for the Bitcoin initiative will be demonstrating tangible national advantages while allaying public concerns over volatility and safety.

Should it be passed, the constitutional amendment would force policymakers to answer gritty questions: how much Bitcoin to hold, how to store it, and how to value it on the SNB's balance sheet. There would also be cross-border effects on Switzerland's diplomatic relations, as reserve composition data are of special interest to other global financial institutions and trading partners.

Whether or not it achieves its stated goal, the project has already accomplished something valuable: it has introduced Bitcoin into the constitutional and monetary-policy debate of one of the world's most respected financial systems. It also indicates a more profound transformation in the nature of public discussion, one in which digital assets are no longer confined to speculative markets but are emerging into the realm of national strategy and legal institutions.

For Switzerland, a country proud of its neutrality, sovereignty, and precision in government, the debate is opportunity and challenge. Whether or not Bitcoin is included in the constitution, the debate itself is a benchmark in the way societies weigh decentralized innovation and institutional tradition.