Peter Schiff Blasts STRC and SEC in Fresh Crypto Warning

Peter Schiff called STRC an obvious Ponzi, criticized Michael Saylor, and questioned SEC decisions on Bitcoin ETFs and Treasury firms.

Peter Schiff renewed his attack on STRC and accused the SEC of failing crypto investors.

He said the product is an “obvious Ponzi” and blamed Michael Saylor for promoting it.

Schiff also questioned past SEC decisions on Bitcoin, including ETF approvals and rules that treated Bitcoin as a commodity, not a security.

Schiff Renews Criticism Of STRC and Michael Saylor

Schiff said STRC is not a subtle case. He argued that “the only sign may be that it seems too good to be true” in many schemes.

He then said that was not true with STRC because, in his view, the risks are plain. He called it “the most obvious Ponzi that has ever existed.”

He also targeted Michael Saylor. Schiff said Saylor created STRC because investor interest in Bitcoin was fading.

He added that he does not own Bitcoin, except for what he called his “Strategic Bitcoin Reserve.” He said that amount is less than a quarter of a Bitcoin and “doesn’t count.”

Sometimes a Ponzi scheme is not obvious. The only sign may be that it seems too good to be true. But that is not the case with $STRC, which is the most obvious Ponzi that has ever existed. The fact that the SEC allows @Saylor to promote it is more proof that we don’t need an SEC.

— Peter Schiff (@PeterSchiff) April 22, 2026

Schiff also said public criticism of Bitcoin can hurt his own audience growth. He said he would likely have more followers if he promoted Bitcoin instead.

He then added that fewer people would buy STRC if it held gold rather than Bitcoin. That statement framed his wider criticism of crypto-linked products.

SEC Criticism Centers On Bitcoin Policy and Market Access

Schiff extended his criticism to the SEC and broader market regulation. He said the agency’s actions show “we don’t need an SEC.”

He tied that claim to decisions that treated Bitcoin as a commodity and allowed Bitcoin ETFs.

He also criticized the path that let Treasury companies attract institutional flows through Bitcoin exposure.

He argued that regulators have not handled other fixed-supply assets in the same way. He said Bitcoin received special treatment, and he said he examines that issue in his book.

Schiff’s comments focused on market structure, not only price. His concern was about how regulation shaped access and demand.

His argument linked policy decisions with investor behavior. In his view, these decisions helped expand capital flows into Bitcoin-related firms and products.

That expansion, he suggested, increased risk for investors who may not track complex structures closely.

Read Also:

“Complete Waste of Capital,” Peter Schiff Says About Bitcoin Amid Global Reserve Questions

Critics Reject Ponzi Label But Raise Structure Concerns

A response to Schiff’s claims argued that high-risk investments are not always scams.

It said that if something were truly “the most obvious Ponzi ever,” regulators would not simply ignore it.

That view rejected Schiff’s label but accepted that STRC carries real structural risks.

The response also pointed to how claims such as STRC, at about 11.5%, sit above the common stock.

It said that changes how much upside reaches common shareholders. It argued that the market has started to price those layers more carefully.

That shift followed criticism from investors such as Jim Chanos.

According to that view, more capital raises and more structured products place added claims on the Bitcoin held in the system.

That does not always benefit common shareholders in a direct way. The response said the market now values the setup at about 1.1 to 1.3 mNAV, not at earlier levels.

It added that the model could still change over time. Saylor could build a type of Bitcoin-focused financial platform.

Still, the response said the current debate should center on value flow to common shareholders.

It said the structure is “not a classic Ponzi” because it is transparent and backed by a real asset.