From Decentralization to Control: How the U.S. Bitcoin Reserve Reshapes Mining Power
Bitcoin was founded on the principle of decentralization, designed to function beyond the control of any single government, corporation, or entity. However, as the United States consolidates its Bitcoin strategy, concerns over the centralization of mining power are growing. The rise of the U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, coupled with increasing U.S. dominance in mining operations, is shifting the global balance of Bitcoin’s network security. While greater institutional involvement signals mainstream adoption, it also raises concerns over censorship, regulatory overreach, and Bitcoin’s long-term ability to resist state control.
The U.S. Leads in Global Bitcoin Mining
Since China’s 2021 crackdown on Bitcoin mining, the U.S. has emerged as the dominant force in global hashrate distribution. As of 2025, more than 38% of Bitcoin’s total hashrate is controlled by U.S.-based mining pools, making it the world’s largest mining hub. This dominance is driven by large-scale mining firms such as Foundry USA, Marathon Digital, and Riot Platforms, which operate massive facilities across states like Texas, Kentucky, and North Dakota.
The presence of regulated mining companies has attracted legitimacy and investment to the industry, but it also introduces new risks. Unlike decentralized, geographically distributed mining, U.S.-based operations are subject to federal regulations, environmental policies, and compliance requirements that could lead to government influence over Bitcoin’s network.
The Link Between the U.S. Bitcoin Reserve and Mining Power
Beyond mining dominance, the U.S. is also gaining financial control over Bitcoin. Major institutions like BlackRock and Fidelity hold significant Bitcoin reserves through ETFs, while companies like MicroStrategy own substantial amounts of the asset. This financial influence complements the country’s expanding control over mining operations, positioning the U.S. as a central force in Bitcoin’s future.
From Financial Inclusion to Hashrate Control
A shift in the Bitcoin mining narrative is emerging among U.S. mining executives and policymakers. Marathon CEO Fred Thiel recently emphasized that U.S. mining companies, both domestic and international, have a mandate to secure enough hashrate for America and its allies. He highlighted how Bitcoin mining is being integrated into the U.S. energy infrastructure: “Bitcoin is the ultimate dispatchable load. Power generators want base load consumption to maintain consistent production. Bitcoin miners can shut down their operations in minutes and ramp them back up, responding to signals from the power grid.”
Thiel pointed out that renewable energy infrastructure, particularly in places like West Texas, has created an energy surplus, occasionally leading to negative energy pricing. To capitalize on this, Marathon acquired a wind farm in Texas, ensuring that excess energy is utilized efficiently.
More notably, Thiel framed Bitcoin mining as a geopolitical asset: “If U.S. Bitcoin miners expand internationally, that hashrate still belongs to the U.S. and its allies. The executive branch is focused on ensuring the U.S. acquires sufficient global hashrate to project power. While American companies go abroad, they are effectively bringing that hashrate home. We are not only exporting dollars through digital currencies and stablecoins but also projecting power through Bitcoin mining.”
This statement underscores a shift in Bitcoin’s role—from a decentralized, global network to a strategic national asset akin to the U.S. dollar. The U.S. is not only strengthening domestic Bitcoin mining but also encouraging its firms to expand globally while keeping operations under American oversight.
The Rising Risks of U.S. Mining Dominance
If the U.S. continues consolidating mining power, government intervention in Bitcoin’s network security could increase significantly. This could lead to scenarios where:
- Transactions are censored based on regulatory decisions.
- Specific wallets are blacklisted.
- Mining pools are forced to comply with OFAC regulations, restricting financial autonomy on what is supposed to be a permissionless network.
The establishment of the U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve further amplifies these concerns. With the government officially holding Bitcoin as a sovereign asset, new regulatory measures could emerge to align mining operations with national interests. This could include restrictions on transactions linked to sanctioned countries, limitations on financial privacy, and taxation policies that favor institutional Bitcoin holders over individual users.
Geographical Diversity vs. U.S. Mining Control
While concerns over U.S. mining centralization are growing, some companies emphasize the importance of geographical diversification. Phoenix Group, a leading mining firm listed on the Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange (ADX) and planning a U.S. listing, operates across five different geographies including US and recently opened a mining site in Ethiopia.
Addressing mining centralization concerns, Phoenix Group stated: “We seek opportunities where reliable and competitive power generation exists. Our recent expansion into Ethiopia reflects this approach. While geographical diversity is important, the U.S. remains an attractive market due to its access to affordable energy, and we plan to grow our capacity there.”
This response highlights the dual nature of U.S. mining dominance. On one hand, regulatory risks and government influence are increasing, but on the other hand, competitive energy prices and financial opportunities make the U.S. difficult to ignore. The willingness of firms like Phoenix Group to expand into the U.S. despite these risks indicates that economic incentives currently outweigh concerns about potential centralization—at least for now.
The Future of Bitcoin’s Mining Power
As the U.S. deepens its involvement in Bitcoin through its Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, concerns over mining centralization will continue to mount. If left unchecked, U.S. mining dominance could lead to transaction censorship, surveillance, and increased regulatory control over Bitcoin’s financial autonomy. However, Bitcoin’s global nature ensures that alternative mining hubs will continue to emerge, sustaining the network’s decentralization.
For Bitcoin to remain truly permissionless, miners, developers, and users must actively support decentralized mining efforts and resist state-led regulatory overreach. The balance between nation-state adoption and Bitcoin’s core ethos of decentralization will shape the next chapter of its evolution.
Coming Next: The Hidden Guardians: How Bitcoin Nodes Protect Decentralization Against Mining Centralization
