Topic: Is bitcoin a legal tender or not. Why? (Read 497 times)

Op your question is vast and has no scope, which might have a straight forward answer. You would have narrow it to a country, region or a continent so that, those who can explain will know where to start from, and like this and from the comments I have read so far are all giving the answers from world wide and bitcoin is not a "legal tender" in the whole world. Or you have to restructure your subject to suit the content. From the comment box, users have listed countries in which bitcoin has been used as a legal tender. And the most popular ones are El Salvador and Republic of Central Africa. For bitcoin to be legal tender means the whole world has accepted bitcoin to buy and sell of goods and service which is the main purpose of the creation of bitcoin.  

With this, it shows that you understand what a legal tender is but the one you had a debate with doesn't understand it. I made such a statement based on the title of your thread. Reading the title appears that you are unsure if bitcoin is a legal tender or not. Maybe you didn't get the perfect title to the thread. But be it as it may, we are on the same page now...cheers.

@Zoomic the quote below is from my OP, and looking at it in comparison to all you explain about what a legal tender is it seems we're on same page but yet you claim that the OP have no understanding of what a legal tender is.

If your statements were a counter explanation different from what my OP defined a legal tender to be it would have been logical to grasp why you said I have no understanding of what a legal tender status is.  So what exactly are you saying?

Here's a part of a statement of my op post, please do your comparison to that of yours.

You are right on your argument. It doesn't matter what we think about Bitcoin being a legal tender or not. This status can only be given by the government. We may be using Bitcoin for a long time and we may be using it for buying goods. It won't be considered as a legal tender unless the government certifies it.

So no matter what think, it's in the hands of the government, really. The legal tender means just that.

You really got your friend cornered with all these valid points but seems he was right in some way just didn't elaborate his point well.

It is because Op do not actually understand the meaning of legal tender, if they do, this question would not arise. A common search of the dictionary will define "legal tender" as coins or banknotes that must be accepted if offered in payment of a debt..

So, if the government of your country has made a law that mandates her citizens to compulsorily accept bitcoin, it therefore means that bitcoin is a legal tender in your country. Otherwise, bitcoin isn't a legal tender in your country.
The status of legal tenderness is only ascertainable in country by country bases. If approached as a whole and from the origin of bitcoin, it is not a legal tender and was not created to be.

In some countries, bitcoin has become a legal means of payment and @YOSHIE and @dansus021 have provided a list of countries along with estimates of the next countries that will use bitcoin as a legal means of payment.
But when someone buys goods or services from the internet using bitcoin, bitcoin has become a legal means of payment apart from using Paypay, credit or debit cards and instead crosses borders between countries and can be used worldwide.
You can find a list of countries that have legalized bitcoin below:
Maybe there are still other countries that have not been included in that list and I think there will be more countries that will make bitcoin a legal tender in the future.
You and your friends can reach one conclusion, there are already countries that have made bitcoin a legal payment and in the future, more and more countries will follow suit.

Your friend's perspective is valid; Bitcoin is widely used for goods and services. However, traditional legal tenders are regulated by governments and central banks, which Bitcoin isn't. It's more akin to a valuable commodity like gold, not a legal tender. The debate highlights Bitcoin's unique position at the intersection of currency and commodity.

The debate about the legality of bitcoin is jurisdiction based. That is it depends on the country that you are pointing to or referring to. So it can not be generalized.

For example you can say bitcoin is a legal tender in El Salvador because it is the country known so far to all that has declared it and backed it by their law as legal tender, that means it use can not be rejected by someone in El Salvador for not being a legal tender. But we can't say because it is legal tender in El Salvador therefore it is a legal tender some where else when they have not made it a law as legal tender.

You made some emphatic statements and anyone who read carefully will understand. We all know that the nature of the government is to control, monitor, regulate and centralize. So, there will never be a perfect marriage between a highly centralized government and totally decentralized coin like bitcoin. Both are moving completely in opposite directions.

So, even if some countries have decided to make bitcoin a legal tender, but by default, bitcoin was not designed to be a legal tender and neither was it designed to fight the fiat.

The Central African Republic canceled the acceptance of bitcoin as a legal tender back in the spring. So at the moment, only El Salvador remains the only country where bitcoin has such a status.

Let me know your country to say it's the legal or illegal one.Because the bitcoin is legal in some country and illegal in some country.So it's essential one to check,whether it's legal or illegal before investing your money in the bitcoin.The bitcoin legalized country use of the bitcoin and USDT as their mode of the payment.Because most of the payment system will charge certain amount as the fee for the transaction.In China,many of the people using other way to buy the cryptocurrency using some middle man.If the cryptocurrency was the legal one in the China,surely they buy more cryptocurrency and help for the growth of cryptocurrency development.

yes bitcoin is a legal tender in some country maybe other will follow you can actually see in the coinmarketcap sites - https://coinmarketcap.com/legal-tender-countries/


Maybe the next country who accept bitcoin as legal tender would be venezuela in my guess



tho one is sure there is lot of government that look into crypto today

Have I have noticed is that the government want to have full control of cryptocurrency that is why many countries have not still yet accepted cryptocurrency as a legal tender. If this was easy for the government, cryptocurrency will be accepted generally by the government with strict control.

 I know things are getting close gradually and there might be a time when the government will want to come in by full force to make regulations for crypto assets. Since all crypto assets cannot stand alone on there own without the government coming in to either accept it or not. I just hope that time will not come now as soon as possible.

My goodness, this looks more like a Bitcoin Discussion thread, where more banal discussions take place, than a Legal thread,  Bitcoin is legal tender where it has been declared legal tender by a law. Period. Not because of the considerations your friend may make for how it is used.

I do not ignore the experience of El Salvador, but this experience is still in its infancy and there are many problems that it faces and cannot be judged definitively.

On the other hand, it is true that El Salvador does not control Bitcoin, but it controls the main wallet, Chifu, which was created by the Salvadoran government. Also, El Salvador can control all third-party services that operate Bitcoin through KYC, AML laws.

I think the main reason why El Salvador accepted Bitcoin as its main currency is that it does not have its own fiat, but rather used the dollar. It is more likely that if El Salvador had its own fiat, it might not accept Bitcoin as an official currency.

In any case, I encourage the experience of El Salvador, and I hope that it will succeed. I also hope that governments will accept Bitcoin as a legal tender.

Are you fundamentally ignoring the example of El Salvador? If so, then why not recall the example of the Central African Republic, where bitcoin was first recognized as a legal tender, and then a year later it was canceled? It would help in your rhetoric. However, until El Salvador reverses its decision, his example demonstrates that it is quite possible for states to operate with something that they do not fully control. Moreover, the other currency of El Salvador is the American dollar, and it is also not controlled by El Salvador, it is controlled by a completely different state. However, El Salvador copes with it. And El Salvador is not the only state that does the same.

Anything outside of government control is not considered legal tender. If Bitcoin does not come under state control, governments will not accept it as legal tender.

The most important feature of Bitcoin is decentralization, and this is completely inconsistent with governments that want to centralize and control everything. Here lies the problem that is difficult to solve. How do governments accept Bitcoin while remaining decentralized?

As for gold and diamonds, it is true that it has a value in itself, but I believe that people or governments are the ones who gave it this value, meaning that if we assume, for example, that in a country the government refuses to accept gold, then it will have no value in that country.

topic " bitcoin is a legal tender" can only be solved by the governing system and authorities of a state , they determined whether it's should be legally tendered or vice-versa

Your question is general, broadly speaking Bitcoin has different laws in each country, illegal or legal.

To overcome the argument of your doubts, Bitcoin as a legal currency or not, you can see it here.

Legality of cryptocurrency by country or territory.

Hopefully, all the quotes / sources above, can overcome the confusion there is about the law that applies to Bitcoin.

USDT is much better quoted than bitcoin in many countries. This is an interesting fact, but USDC, DAI and other stabelcoins have a lower exchange rate. So when going to another country, it's better to take care of USDT in the Ether or TRON ecosystem, because they are the most popular. In other ecosystems the exchange rate will be less.

I see Bitcoin more as a barter token at the moment, in most countries where the government has not accepted Bitcoin as "Legal Tender" A citizen can "trade" goods and services in his community for anything, without breaking the rules of the country... (Example : I can trade you 4 eggs for a bundle of wood.)

The moment when I open a business and I enter the formal market and I advertise that I "only" accept Bitcoin as a payment option, then it becomes a problem in the eyes of the government that did not accept Bitcoin as a "legal tender". 

The government protect their monopoly over the "printing of currencies" with guns and intimidation. 

I don't see any reason for a debate when we all knowntha Bitcoin is not globally acceptable for trades because there are countries that put a red flag on it. Till now there are still countries that ban the use of Bitcoin for transaction of any sort so this should ring a bell that it csause for no debate. Maybe in the nearest future, Bitcoin might become a global currency is there is a agreement consensus on the use of Bitcoin for trade. Bitcoin may be legal tender in your own state but there are many countries that still put a red flag on the use if Bitcoin of any kind of transactions.

Where bitcoin is a means of payment, then a custodial wallet is used for storage, as in El Salvador. If governments make cryptocurrencies legal tender, then control will be similar to banking.
Personally, it’s easier for me to use a bank card and not pay commissions for cryptocurrency transactions.

You are great. That is it, and there's nothing controversial about it. You understood my explanation very well. That is exactly how it is, in as much as there is no central government of the whole world, there is no how one country would make a decision that will affect the whole other countries.

Even if United States of America makes bitcoin legal tender today. It does not automatically translate that bitcoin is now a legal tender in every other countries. The only way to make bitcoin illegal tender and indirectly for all the countries is for it to be the the reserve currency of the world and I have seen some people made some argument and assertion about bitcoin tilting towards that end, but I do not have high hopes for it. All I am interested about is that the government should let bitcoin be and also let the fiat be. Whoever wants to use bitcoin should, and whoever wants to use fiat should, that is the essence of Bitcoin.

When you say something is legal, it refers to something that is generally accepted by the government of the country. For example, if you have a dollar note and want to spend it in a rural area near you and they don't know the currency, you will have difficulty because they don't know it, despite the fact that dollar currency is generally accepted globally. The people in the community cannot do anything against you because the money is legitimate. In your statement, bitcoin is not a legal tender. We know bitcoin is recognized globally, but it does not mean it is acceptable as a mode of payment; for it to be legalized, it must be approved by the government.



Bitcoin was created to provide us with financial freedom, which implies that we may access our funds without any wait or hassle from the authorities. Our government decided a few months ago to convert part of our money, 200, 500, and 1000, which he accomplished without delay. The government deliberately decided not to work with Bitcoin because it does not add value to the country's economy, all individual transactions are done without passing through the central bank and it was affecting them, governments again noticed that if he decided to remain silent about bitcoin, they would lose control over its citizens. When the government issues an order to change the naira note, residents instantly respond to the decree and begin to reject it. This is merely Bitcoin's power, hence it is not legal tender.



You can't argue no government has legalized it when there is one, which El Salvador is proud of. He has given us hope that Bitcoin is here to stay; if every country tried to emulate El Salvador, it would go a long way, but it will not happen due to personal interests.

Indeed bitcoin to an extent has  similar value with  gold, silver and diamond but be it as it may can not be considered a  legal tender because the exchange of bitcoin with goods or services rendered from my point of view occurs only on individual level and not at the state level.
Despite the visible appreciation of bitcoin in the globe today no government has yet legalised it as legal tender yet because to everyone of them they believe that it's root and origin is not authentic in a physical sense and as such can diminish some day, so imagine 80% of a country's wealth on bitcoin and it crashes someday which I pray not.

That is exactly it. Being adopted as a legal tender in a particular country doesn’t make it a legal tender in another country. So in these countries that it is not a legal tender it doesn’t mean individuals or citizens can’t accept it from each other but this is done at their own preference and not government approved, so If anything should happen you wouldn’t hold any one responsible for it since you accepted it at your own will.

Example could be an old naira which the government has rendered obsolete and not longer a legal tender. So once someone brings it to you, you have the right to reject it or even accept it if you have anywhere you also could use it. But once it is a legal tender then you have no right to refuse the currency

To be able to tell the difference we must know first what legal tender is.


 So according to the explanation, legal tender is something that is officially recognized that is accepted by the law.  See the keywords there,  the law and officially recognized.  So to be able to tell if something is a legal tender, it should be recognized by the government and Bitcoin is yet to be recognized as legal tender by most of the country and in US Bitcoin is accepted as a commodity.

If we are living in El Salvador, we can say that Bitcoin is a legal tender since it is recognized by the El Salvador government as one but if we live in the US, it is not.  Same goes in my country, Bitcoin is not a legal tender but was recognized as mode of payment.

Being used for exchange does not make a currency a legal tender. Anything of value can be exchanged for another thing or product of value which does not make it a legal tender.

That is not how it works. It is governments that choose what currency to make legal tenders and not choosing from a pool of potential legal tenders which they should legalize.

- Jay -

Bitcoin is not a legal tender where some countries banned the use of Bitcoin and others only adapt Bitcoin but did not make Bitcoin a legal tender. Anyway, Bitcoin is a legal tender where but only El Salvador have done it. As far as I know, I don't know other countries that does the same as what El Salvador did. So in my opinion, Bitcoin are both legal tender (El Salvador) and not legal to most.

No BTC is not a legal tender in any country other than El-Salvador. Because The government of El-Salvador has made BTC a legal tender which means, they have reserved in there national reserve's in the form of BTC and the government has made some steps to provide free BTC among the citizens so that they all could get familiar with the system for free.

Your concept us right, as Legal tender and making something legal are two different things, as many other members have also shed some light so i will just make it short, that Legal tender is the one currency that a government will use for national reserves and it will have the currency as national currency like BTC and the adoption will be made easy by the government while BTC is being Legal means, government will not help you in adoption of BTC but they will nore stop you either.

In my opinion, I think that for something to become legal tender, it must have been approved by the government of any nation before it can be fully used in any organization or sector of that country. But as long as Bitcoin is never in full acceptance in the majority of the world's countries, it's not a legal tender yet, apart from El Salvador, which has declared it a legal tender. Apart from that, Bitcoin is not yet legal tender in most countries. because, if it is, that means banks are supposed to even accept Bitcoin and give you cash should you have such a request (just my thoughts). Also, hospitals, schools, general markets, etc. would accept Bitcoin if it became legal tender.

Ordinarily you op supposed under the term Bitcoin and it uses and usage because you started the forum from newbie in 2022. What you would have explained is the part your friend explained. You would have given him examples of countries that have adopted Bitcoin as a legal tender.

Now let me give you some fraction on it. Bitcoin is a legal tender in world but it meant for the individual countries to accept it. If Bitcoin is not a legal tender El Salvador and Central African Republic wouldn't adopted it in the individual countries. Now some countries are afraid to adopt it because their fear is Bitcoin will take over their country economy so they ban it to be used. Bitcoin is a decentralized system and that doesn't mean that the world leaders can not stop Bitcoin, they can stop if Bitcoin is not a legal tender in the world but Bitcoin is a legal tender so it is for the individual countries to accept the new technology or not. But time is still coming that many countries will adopt the technology to support their economy as El Salvador and others have done.

Op so as a member in this forum you are to boldly speak the truth with Bitcoin enthusiast.

This is issue is really get controversial with each comments but let me draw an understanding here. So bitcoin being a legal tender is a subjective matter subject to the specific geographical location where it is accepted by the government of that area. And outside such jurisdiction is loses its legal tender designation.
 For instance, it is said to be a legal tender in El Salvador but  ceased to be a legal tender within a country like Ghana because it's not accepted by the country's government yet.  Is that it?

Legal tender is a term, let's use a dictionary to define the concept.


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/legal tender

What we see is "must be accepted", i.e. someone has to make sure that anyone can pay with the legal tender whenever they want, and the recipient has no right to refuse him. It is the state that has the right to do so. Accordingly, where the state, as in El Salvador, has recognized bitcoin as the legal tender, there it is. In all other countries, it is a matter of agreement between the two parties whether they agree to use bitcoin for payments, unless otherwise prohibited by law.

Bitcoin is not yet legal tender because it is not widely acknowledged as a general money for the exchange of goods and services on a worldwide scale.

The Oxford dictionary defines legal tender as In this scenario, Bitcoin is not yet legal money because so many countries have not yet made Bitcoin legal in their jurisdictions.

Furthermore, many people are still unaware of Bitcoin since they do not understand it, and before something becomes legal tender, it must have global recognition and be something that everyone agrees on as a means of payment.

I think what many enthusiastic find appealing is that Crypto-currency breaks out of the centralized system where the government have to have control of individuals financial system. Bitcoin is a great option that promotes the values of privacy protection and also anonymity.

With that as a point Bitcoin isn't under the control of any government, institution then who has the right to actually proclaim Bitcoin legal or not? Well the point is that Bitcoin is a decentralized system (freedom) meaning if two people or parties agree on Bitcoin being their means of exchange then it can be done. The government can't stop that.

Bitcoin is a legal tender, and it's also not a legal tender; it all depends on where it's being used, just as explained by iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2. If you are talking about legal tender when you are referring to El Salvador, then yes, Bitcoin is legal tender, but if it's in other countries where it's not fully accepted by the government, then no, Bitcoin is not legal tender. So the argument is that both sides are correct to me based on their own arguing points.

It's only when one refers to Bitcoin being a global legal tender that I can boldly say NO. Because it's not accepted in all countries, some are Bitcoin friendly while others are not, and some are both, so we can't just judge based on the idea or story from a Bitcoin-friendly country; others should also be put into the picture.

Bitcoin is a legal tender in countries like El Salvador which already accept Bitcoin and signed into law as legal tender, but in other countries where the government have not recognised Bitcoin yet as legal tender, bitcoin remains as just assets in the hands of the citizens.


So Bitcoin means different things to different individuals, it all depends on the region where the individual is located but general bitcoin is in the class of gold and other metal assets whose legal status depends on the location of usage.

We still can't say Bitcoin is a legal tender as implemented in El Salvador.
Many countries of the world still do not want Bitcoin to become legal tender for various valid reasons.
Those of us who are members of a large community really want Bitcoin to become a legal means of payment because Bitcoin has been proven to be able to provide solutions from the beginning to the present.

No need to argue, if Bitcoin can still be exchanged into fiat so that transactions can be made in our country, then continue our activities by investing or trading as usual.

You can consider Bitcoin as legal tender if you can use it to pay on a local vendor without asking them if they accept Bitcoin as payment. Vendor is legally required to accept Bitcoin as mode of payment if Bitcoin is really a legal tender right now.

Some services accepts Bitcoin for payment but they are doing it voluntarily and not required by the law. That’s the importance of the word legal on Legal tender.

Let's go this way;

• Legal tender is not about usage but about government acceptability and endorsement
• This means that what is a legal tender in your own country, will definitely not be what is a legal tender in my own country
• By default, bitcoin is not a legal tender and was not created to be a legal tender, because it is not under the control of any cemtral authority
• However, if any country wishes to make bitcoin a legal tender, they are at liberty to do so because the ideology of bitcoin is liberty and/or freedom. Just like what El Salvador did

 Bitcoin is not a legal tender,it is only the government of a country that can make bitcoin a legal tender by signing it into law. People are using bitcoin universal because of it decentralized pattern that makes the users anonymous and it is also a payment method. It is because bitcoin started to increase in value as time pass on and due to the halving event,this made bitcoin became valuable and people started using it as an assets and a store of value. Another reason for using it as a store of value is because bitcoin is inflation resistance. These are the reasons why bitcoin is used for goods and services worldwide. It is only Elsavado that has accepted bitcoin as a legal tender.

The back and forth argument between you and  your friend is an interesting one, however both of you are right in one way or the other.
Bitcoin as we all know is a decentralised digital currency that has monitoriy value.
So in real sense, bitcoin is a legal tender and it's a global currency.

I don't think Bitcoin can be considered a legal tender from an universal point of view right now. The only exception is El Salvador, and perhaps soon in other countries ? (maybe in Africa or South America?)

Being a medium of exchange doesn't make you a legal tender, otherwise cocaine could be one too, for example.


You answered your own question, having value, whether high or low, is not enough to make one a legal tender.

Being a legal tender is not subjective, there's no real debate about it, only laws that say whether or not it is.

Still in the course of learning.
Got into a slight debate with a friend about bitcoin. The whole argument was if bitcoin is a legal tender or not. And he was emphasizing on the premises that bitcoin is a legal tender in the sense that it is used for the exchange of goods and services around the world. And that by the virtue of people using it it's therefore a legal tender.

On the other side I was trying to explain to him that a legal tender is that which is accepted by the government and under the regulation of any central bank and this is not so with bitcoin. Furthermore, that one of the reasons people accept  bitcoin for exchange of goods and services is because the coin it is like a digital gold that has value specially for long term storage and also with equal unit of value anywhere in the world, etc. Using gold or diamond as obvious example of things that has value, I asked him a rhetorical question; that just because these objects has value and could be used as a means of exchange does it make them to be regarded as a legal tender?

To clear the air about the whole argument I considered I should share this in the forum to have a clear stand if bitcoin is a legal tender or not.