The International Monetary Fund says El Salvador has documented a different source for the Bitcoin accumulated since June 2025: private donations rather than government spending.
In a September 3 statement, IMF staff said documentation verified that Bitcoin accumulation since the fund’s first program review “reflects private donations” and that no public resources were used. The first review was completed June 27, 2025.
The wording is narrower—and more informative—than the claim that El Salvador simply stopped using Bitcoin.
What the IMF actually confirmed
The statement followed a staff-level agreement on the combined second and third reviews of El Salvador’s 40-month Extended Fund Facility. The agreement remains subject to IMF Executive Board approval and completion of prior actions. If approved, El Salvador would receive approximately $140 million.
Within that broader program update, the IMF made three Bitcoin-related points. First, recent accumulation was documented as private donations. Second, no public resources financed that accumulation. Third, the fund said no further accumulation beyond documented donations is expected.
Those statements concern the source and expected continuation of new accumulation. They do not say that previously held government Bitcoin was sold, surrendered or rendered inaccessible.
Public purchases, holdings and custody are different questions
“No public resources were used” answers a financing question. It does not by itself answer how much Bitcoin public-sector entities currently control, where every coin is custodied or whether wallets display transfers among addresses.
The IMF’s earlier program documentation defined public-sector Bitcoin broadly, covering hot and cold wallets owned or controlled by public entities. It also treated voluntary accumulation as including purchases and mining, while excluding Bitcoin acquired through forfeiture, seizure, custody and similar law-enforcement circumstances.
That framework explains why a visible balance increase does not automatically prove a new government purchase. Donations, transfers between controlled wallets and custodial movements can alter what an outside observer sees without requiring a fresh expenditure from the treasury.
Chivo’s control has changed, but the government still has a role
The IMF also said public participation in the Chivo e-wallet has been substantially unwound. Majority ownership and operational control have moved to a private operator. The government retained a minority stake and custodial responsibilities for customer assets.
That is another area where precise language matters. Chivo was not described as simply disappearing, and government involvement was not described as falling to zero. Control, minority ownership and custody are separate legal and operational roles.
The IMF said El Salvador and fund staff also agreed on further steps to modernize digital-asset regulation and strengthen governance and risk management for public-sector crypto holdings.
This does not settle the mining question
Government Bitcoin purchases are also different from mining and energy projects. El Salvador has been associated with both state-linked geothermal mining and larger private development proposals, but those activities should not be folded into a headline about treasury purchases without evidence.
Bitcoin Almanack’s Volcano Energy investigation explains one frequently confused example. Volcano Energy is a separate, Tether-backed public-private venture whose plans began with solar and wind capacity before a possible geothermal phase. It is not interchangeable with the government’s original small geothermal mining program or with a public-market Bitcoin purchase.
The IMF’s newest statement concerns documented accumulation and public resources. It should not be stretched into a conclusion about every mining machine, energy project or private investment connected to El Salvador.
Why the clarification matters
El Salvador’s public Bitcoin messaging and its IMF commitments have often appeared to point in different directions. The September statement supplies a mechanism that can reconcile at least part of that tension: Bitcoin can enter a documented reserve through private donation without the government spending new public money to buy it.
That does not remove the need for transparent wallet reporting. The IMF explicitly said work continues to improve transparency across the various wallets and to strengthen governance for public-sector holdings.
Bottom line
The IMF did not announce that El Salvador abandoned Bitcoin. It said documentation showed that Bitcoin accumulated since the June 2025 first review came from private donations and used no public resources, with no further accumulation expected beyond documented donations.
The narrow reading is the accurate one: no new publicly financed accumulation during the stated period, not necessarily no holdings, no custody role, no mining and no private Bitcoin development.
Quick answers
Did El Salvador stop holding Bitcoin?
The IMF statement did not say that. It addressed the source of Bitcoin accumulated since June 2025, not the liquidation of existing holdings.
Did El Salvador use government money for recent Bitcoin accumulation?
According to documentation described by the IMF, no public resources were used; the accumulation reflected private donations.
Is Volcano Energy a government Bitcoin purchase program?
No. It is a separate energy and mining venture and should not be treated as the same thing as a treasury purchase or the government’s original geothermal mining operation.