Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff, who declared in 2018 that Bitcoin was more likely to crash to $100 than rally to $100,000, has returned. He indirectly admitted he was wrong and outlined reasons why his prediction fell through.  Harvard Economist Breaks Silence On Missed Bitcoin Prediction In an X post, Rogoff identified himself as the Harvard economist who said that Bitcoin was more likely to be worth $100 than $100,000. He then went on to comment on what he missed when he made this prediction. First, the economist said that he was far too optimistic about the U.S. coming to its senses about sensible crypto regulation.  Related Reading: Crypto Founder Predicts The Collapse Of Bitcoin In This Timeframe Rogoff, who was the former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), indicated that the Donald Trump administration has gone about Bitcoin and crypto regulation in the wrong way. He questioned why policymakers would want to facilitate tax evasion and illegal activities, likely in reference to regulations such as the GENIUS Act, which have provided regulatory clarity.  It is worth mentioning that one of the reasons the Harvard economist had predicted that Bitcoin was more likely to go to $100 was based on his belief that government regulation would trigger lower prices. He had made this prediction when BTC was trading at around $11,000. Rogoff claimed back then that the flagship crypto needed global regulation to crack down on its use for money laundering.  The former IMF chief believed that if this regulation took away the possibility of money laundering and tax evasion, then Bitcoin’s actual use cases for transactions were very small. As such, he was banking on BTC lacking any demand, which would drive its price lower rather than higher.  However, that hasn’t been the case as government regulation has only boosted Bitcoin’s demand. The flagship crypto rallied to $100,000, a price level Rogoff said it won’t reach, for the first time last year following Donald Trump’s victory. Meanwhile, BTC has reached new highs on the back of regulatory clarity, including its rally to a previous all-time high (ATH) just before the passage of the GENIUS Act last month.  Further Reasons For The Missed Prediction The Harvard economist also stated that he did not appreciate how Bitcoin would compete with fiat currencies to serve as the transaction medium of choice in the $20 trillion global underground economy. He further remarked that this demand puts a floor on its price.  Related Reading: Two Scenarios Map Out Bitcoin Price Crash After Recovery In addition to being a transaction medium of choice, BTC has also gained a reputation as a store of value, which has created demand for it among traditional finance (TradFi) investors. These investors have gained exposure to Bitcoin mainly through the ETFs. Interestingly, Harvard recently revealed a $117 million stake in BlackRock’s BTC ETF.  Lastly, Rogoff said that he did not anticipate a situation where regulators, especially the regulator in chief, would be able to brazenly hold hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in crypto without consequence, considering the “blatant conflict of interest.”  At the time of writing, the Bitcoin price is trading at around $113,600, up in the last 24 hours, according to data from CoinMarketCap. Featured image from Pixabay, chart from Tradingview.comHarvard economist Kenneth Rogoff, who declared in 2018 that Bitcoin was more likely to crash to $100 than rally to $100,000, has returned. He indirectly admitted he was wrong and outlined reasons why his prediction fell through.  Harvard Economist Breaks Silence On Missed Bitcoin Prediction In an X post, Rogoff identified himself as the Harvard economist who said that Bitcoin was more likely to be worth $100 than $100,000. He then went on to comment on what he missed when he made this prediction. First, the economist said that he was far too optimistic about the U.S. coming to its senses about sensible crypto regulation.  Related Reading: Crypto Founder Predicts The Collapse Of Bitcoin In This Timeframe Rogoff, who was the former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), indicated that the Donald Trump administration has gone about Bitcoin and crypto regulation in the wrong way. He questioned why policymakers would want to facilitate tax evasion and illegal activities, likely in reference to regulations such as the GENIUS Act, which have provided regulatory clarity.  It is worth mentioning that one of the reasons the Harvard economist had predicted that Bitcoin was more likely to go to $100 was based on his belief that government regulation would trigger lower prices. He had made this prediction when BTC was trading at around $11,000. Rogoff claimed back then that the flagship crypto needed global regulation to crack down on its use for money laundering.  The former IMF chief believed that if this regulation took away the possibility of money laundering and tax evasion, then Bitcoin’s actual use cases for transactions were very small. As such, he was banking on BTC lacking any demand, which would drive its price lower rather than higher.  However, that hasn’t been the case as government regulation has only boosted Bitcoin’s demand. The flagship crypto rallied to $100,000, a price level Rogoff said it won’t reach, for the first time last year following Donald Trump’s victory. Meanwhile, BTC has reached new highs on the back of regulatory clarity, including its rally to a previous all-time high (ATH) just before the passage of the GENIUS Act last month.  Further Reasons For The Missed Prediction The Harvard economist also stated that he did not appreciate how Bitcoin would compete with fiat currencies to serve as the transaction medium of choice in the $20 trillion global underground economy. He further remarked that this demand puts a floor on its price.  Related Reading: Two Scenarios Map Out Bitcoin Price Crash After Recovery In addition to being a transaction medium of choice, BTC has also gained a reputation as a store of value, which has created demand for it among traditional finance (TradFi) investors. These investors have gained exposure to Bitcoin mainly through the ETFs. Interestingly, Harvard recently revealed a $117 million stake in BlackRock’s BTC ETF.  Lastly, Rogoff said that he did not anticipate a situation where regulators, especially the regulator in chief, would be able to brazenly hold hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in crypto without consequence, considering the “blatant conflict of interest.”  At the time of writing, the Bitcoin price is trading at around $113,600, up in the last 24 hours, according to data from CoinMarketCap. Featured image from Pixabay, chart from Tradingview.com

Economist Who Predicted Bitcoin Would Go To $100 Before $100,000 Returns

2025/08/21 20:00
3 min read

Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff, who declared in 2018 that Bitcoin was more likely to crash to $100 than rally to $100,000, has returned. He indirectly admitted he was wrong and outlined reasons why his prediction fell through. 

Harvard Economist Breaks Silence On Missed Bitcoin Prediction

In an X post, Rogoff identified himself as the Harvard economist who said that Bitcoin was more likely to be worth $100 than $100,000. He then went on to comment on what he missed when he made this prediction. First, the economist said that he was far too optimistic about the U.S. coming to its senses about sensible crypto regulation. 

Rogoff, who was the former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), indicated that the Donald Trump administration has gone about Bitcoin and crypto regulation in the wrong way. He questioned why policymakers would want to facilitate tax evasion and illegal activities, likely in reference to regulations such as the GENIUS Act, which have provided regulatory clarity. 

It is worth mentioning that one of the reasons the Harvard economist had predicted that Bitcoin was more likely to go to $100 was based on his belief that government regulation would trigger lower prices. He had made this prediction when BTC was trading at around $11,000. Rogoff claimed back then that the flagship crypto needed global regulation to crack down on its use for money laundering. 

The former IMF chief believed that if this regulation took away the possibility of money laundering and tax evasion, then Bitcoin’s actual use cases for transactions were very small. As such, he was banking on BTC lacking any demand, which would drive its price lower rather than higher. 

However, that hasn’t been the case as government regulation has only boosted Bitcoin’s demand. The flagship crypto rallied to $100,000, a price level Rogoff said it won’t reach, for the first time last year following Donald Trump’s victory. Meanwhile, BTC has reached new highs on the back of regulatory clarity, including its rally to a previous all-time high (ATH) just before the passage of the GENIUS Act last month. 

Further Reasons For The Missed Prediction

The Harvard economist also stated that he did not appreciate how Bitcoin would compete with fiat currencies to serve as the transaction medium of choice in the $20 trillion global underground economy. He further remarked that this demand puts a floor on its price. 

In addition to being a transaction medium of choice, BTC has also gained a reputation as a store of value, which has created demand for it among traditional finance (TradFi) investors. These investors have gained exposure to Bitcoin mainly through the ETFs. Interestingly, Harvard recently revealed a $117 million stake in BlackRock’s BTC ETF. 

Lastly, Rogoff said that he did not anticipate a situation where regulators, especially the regulator in chief, would be able to brazenly hold hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in crypto without consequence, considering the “blatant conflict of interest.” 

At the time of writing, the Bitcoin price is trading at around $113,600, up in the last 24 hours, according to data from CoinMarketCap.

Bitcoin
Market Opportunity
Threshold Logo
Threshold Price(T)
$0.006531
$0.006531$0.006531
-6.76%
USD
Threshold (T) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Tags:

You May Also Like

Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future

Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future

The post Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. “It’s a raid on American innovation that would deliver pennies to the Treasury while kneecapping the very engine of our economic and medical progress,” writes Pipes. Getty Images Washington is addicted to taxing success. Now, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is floating a plan to skim half the patent earnings from inventions developed at universities with federal funding. It’s being sold as a way to shore up programs like Social Security. In reality, it’s a raid on American innovation that would deliver pennies to the Treasury while kneecapping the very engine of our economic and medical progress. Yes, taxpayer dollars support early-stage research. But the real payoff comes later—in the jobs created, cures discovered, and industries launched when universities and private industry turn those discoveries into real products. By comparison, the sums at stake in patent licensing are trivial. Universities collectively earn only about $3.6 billion annually in patent income—less than the federal government spends on Social Security in a single day. Even confiscating half would barely register against a $6 trillion federal budget. And yet the damage from such a policy would be anything but trivial. The true return on taxpayer investment isn’t in licensing checks sent to Washington, but in the downstream economic activity that federally supported research unleashes. Thanks to the bipartisan Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, universities and private industry have powerful incentives to translate early-stage discoveries into real-world products. Before Bayh-Dole, the government hoarded patents from federally funded research, and fewer than 5% were ever licensed. Once universities could own and license their own inventions, innovation exploded. The result has been one of the best returns on investment in government history. Since 1996, university research has added nearly $2 trillion to U.S. industrial output, supported 6.5 million jobs, and launched more than 19,000 startups. Those companies pay…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 03:26
XRP Ledger Unlocks Permissioned Domains With 91% Validator Backing

XRP Ledger Unlocks Permissioned Domains With 91% Validator Backing

XRP Ledger activated XLS-80 after 91% validator approval, enabling permissioned domains for credential-gated use on the public XRPL. The XRP Ledger has activated
Share
LiveBitcoinNews2026/02/06 13:00
TrendX Taps Trusta AI to Develop Safer and Smarter Web3 Network

TrendX Taps Trusta AI to Develop Safer and Smarter Web3 Network

The purpose of collaboration is to advance the Web3 landscape by combining the decentralized infrastructure of TrendX with AI-led capabilities of Trusta AI.
Share
Blockchainreporter2025/09/18 01:07