FDP in favor of holding period –
FDP signals support for retaining the holding period for Bitcoin
Any clear political position is important in the debate about a possible new tax on Bitcoin and other crypto assets. This makes a recent signal from the FDP all the more remarkable.
The starting point was a contribution by Frank Schäffler, member of the FDP’s federal executive, on his party’s tax policy. When asked whether the FDP had also clearly rejected a crypto tax, Schäffler replied to X succinctly and unambiguously: “Of course, we were never in favor of it”. This is an important political signal for the Bitcoin Bundesverband.
This makes it clear that there is still a liberal voice within the FDP that opposes an additional tax burden on Bitcoin and other crypto assets and does not question the existing holding period.
Any clear political position is important in the debate about a possible new tax on Bitcoin and other crypto assets. This makes a recent signal from the FDP all the more remarkable.
The starting point was a contribution by Frank Schäffler, member of the FDP’s federal executive, on his party’s tax policy. When asked whether the FDP had also clearly rejected a crypto tax, Schäffler replied to X succinctly and unambiguously: “Of course, we were never in favor of it”. This is an important political signal for the Bitcoin Bundesverband.
This makes it clear that there is still a liberal voice within the FDP that opposes an additional tax burden on Bitcoin and other crypto assets and does not question the existing holding period.
Frank Schäffler positions himself clearly
This statement is particularly relevant in light of a recent article by Frank Schäffler in Die Welt. There, he sharply criticizes the German government’s plans to tax Bitcoin “differently” in future and abolish the one-year holding period. He sees this as a breach of promise and an expression of a policy that does not want to make savings and is therefore looking for new sources of income. In his text, Schäffler also makes it clear that, in his view, Bitcoin should not be treated like shares or bonds, but is structurally more comparable to digital gold.
Schäffler also argues that the repeatedly invoked crime cudgel against Bitcoin is not factually valid. He points to the traceability of Bitcoin transactions and contrasts this with the much more difficult traceability of cash use. He also takes up the reference to Austria: In retrospect, the abolition of the holding period there was not a success story, he says, but above all resulted in more bureaucracy, greater complexity and little additional benefit for the state.
A positive signal for the debate on the holding period
The Bitcoin Bundesverband expressly welcomes this position. Especially in a phase in which parts of the German government and the SPD in particular are putting political pressure on the holding period, an open liberal counter-position is important. The existing regulation stands for long-term thinking, personal responsibility and private provision. Those who hold Bitcoin for years are not speculating in the short term, but often act with the motive of sustainable wealth creation.
Frank Schäffler makes precisely this point. In his article, he explicitly describes the holding period not as a gift to speculators, but as a commitment to personal responsibility. Those who save for the long term and make private provisions should not be penalized by the state.
Hope for a clear line from the new FDP leadership
There is also another political aspect: the FDP has had a new federal chairman in Wolfgang Kubicki since the end of May 2026. This is shown both by the FDP itself on its team page and the published overview of the election results of the federal party conference.
The Bitcoin Bundesverband hopes that the new party leadership will share this liberal stance on Bitcoin and the holding period and also take a clear stance against a crypto tax. In the current situation, a clear stance from the FDP would be an important signal for many Bitcoin savers, for innovation-friendly financial policy and for maintaining reliable tax conditions.
Why Schäffler’s signal is important
Frank Schäffler is not a marginal figure within the FDP. According to the FDP, he is an assessor on the federal executive committee and a member of the basic program commission. His open support for retaining the holding period is therefore politically relevant.
Precisely because he expresses himself so unequivocally on X and also underpins his position in a detailed newspaper article, this is a positive signal. It shows that the debate about Bitcoin and the holding period is not one-sided. There are still political voices that see Bitcoin not as a fiscal problem, but as an expression of freedom, precaution and monetary personal responsibility.
Conclusion
Frank Schäffler’s clear statement that the FDP has never been in favor of a crypto tax is an encouraging signal in an increasingly heated debate. His Welt article also makes it clear that there is still a well-founded and liberal defense of the holding period within the FDP.
The Bitcoin Bundesverband expressly welcomes this position. At the same time, the hope remains that the new FDP federal chairman Wolfgang Kubicki will also support this line and that the FDP as a whole will clearly position itself in favor of maintaining the holding period for Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. It is a positive sign if a member of the FDP’s federal executive board supports this so openly on X.
Note: This article was written by a member or author of the Bitcoin Bundesverband and reflects their personal opinion. It does not necessarily represent the official position of the Bitcoin Bundesverband.
