It sounds to me like SAB121 wanted banks to never touch bitcoin, and it effectively forbade banks from just taking custody of it by assigning a value of $0 to the bitcoin on the asset side of their balance sheet but requiring mark to market accounting on the liability side…so depositing $200M of bitcoin would require bank to add $200M of non-bitcoin assets to their balance sheet to cover the deposit.
That’s lame as hell.
Worse if Bitcoin increased in value they would need to acquire more assets to cover the risk.
I suspect this was pushed by the Elizabeth Warren pro-bank regime as Gensler was her lapdog. They were so blinded by an anti-crypto mindset that they worked against the banks in this instance. It seems like it would have made more sense for their side to help banks to custody as much Bitcoin as possible to try to control a large portion of the supply (like the ETFs).
