Who should have authority to buy, sell, lend, hedge, or custody Bitcoin?
Authority lives in a board-approved signing matrix that maps each action — acquisition, disposal, lending, hedging, custody transfer, key rotation — to a named role and quorum. Routine accumulation may sit with the Treasurer under defined limits. Material disposals, lending, and hedging require pre-authorised SRF triggers or explicit board action. No single signer authorises movement of Bitcoin between custody domains.
Why this question gets asked
Authority is usually inherited from the cash-management matrix. Bitcoin's irreversibility and 24/7 settlement require a tighter version.
Treasury v1 asks vs. Treasury v2 asks
- Does the CFO sign off?
- Who has the keys?
- Which actions can be taken at 03:00 UTC without the board?
- When did we last rehearse the signing quorum?
“Who should have authority to buy, sell, lend, hedge, or custody Bitcoin?”
“Which actions are pre-authorised, which require quorum, and which require the board — and is the matrix tested?”
Authority is usually inherited from the cash-management matrix. Bitcoin's irreversibility and 24/7 settlement require a…
What decision-makers should watch
- Signing matrix mapped to each in-scope action
- Quorum tested in a recurring signing rehearsal
- Disposal authority bounded by SRF triggers
- Lending and hedging governed by separate approved sub-policies
Related questions
Satoshi Institute view
Authority is who can move Bitcoin, under what conditions, with what quorum. Everything else is org-chart theatre.
Glossary terms
Cross-reference the institutional glossary, RARTA, SRF, and BEOL.