The Influence of Political Decisions on Bitcoin Prices with Good Corporate Governance as A Moderating Variable
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55826/jtmit.v4i3.1640Keywords:
Bitcoin, Political Decisions, Good Corporate Governance, Volatility, Digital AssetsAbstract
This study examines the impact of political decisions on Bitcoin price volatility, with Good Corporate Governance (GCG) as a moderating variable. While Bitcoin is often perceived as a decentralized asset independent of government control, empirical evidence suggests that regulatory announcements, geopolitical tensions, and national legal tenders significantly influence market sentiment and price fluctuations (Aditya & Wijaya, 2024). This research utilizes a quantitative approach with secondary data from 2020 to 2025, capturing major political shifts and global economic policies. The analysis focuses on how the quality of corporate governance within major institutional holders of Bitcoin moderates the transmission of political shocks to asset prices. Preliminary findings indicate that political decisions regarding restrictive regulations tend to decrease prices, whereas institutional adoption backed by strong GCG frameworks serves as a buffer against extreme volatility. This study contributes to the literature on digital asset management and provides strategic insights for investors and policymakers in navigating the complex intersection of global politics and financial technology.
References
[1] Digital Asset Volatility and Global Political Risk: A Time-Series Analysis. Journal of Financial Technology and Economics, 12(2), 145-162.
[2] Fahri, M., & Wijaya, A. (2024). The Moderating Role of Good Corporate Governance in Cryptocurrency Markets. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 18(3), 210-228.
[3] Hidayat, T., & Pratama, S. (2025). Institutional Adoption of Bitcoin: From Speculation to Strategic Asset. Global Finance Review, 29(1), 45-60.
[4] Lubis, H. (2024). Regulatory Shocks and Crypto-Market Reactions: Evidence from G20 Countries. Asian Journal of Economics and Banking, 8(4), 312-330.
[5] Mulyani, S. (2023). Risk Management and Transparency in Digital Asset Holdings. Corporate Ownership & Control, 20(2), 88-102.
[6] Nasution, E. (2022). Asymmetric Information and Panic Selling in Cryptocurrency Markets. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 15(3), 175-189.
[7] Pratama, A. (2023). Geopolitics and the Future of Decentralized Finance. Journal of International Relations and Global Economy, 10(1), 12-29.
[8] Rahman, F. (2026). Corporate Governance Standards in the Age of Digital Transformation. Modern Management Journal, 22(1), 55-72.
[9] Saraswati, D. (2023). The Impact of Legal Tender Decisions on Market Sentiment: Case Studies of Emerging Economies. Emerging Markets Review, 34(2), 101-118.
[10] Siregar, B., & Utami, L. (2024). Macroeconomic Indicators vs. Political Decisions: What Drives Bitcoin Prices? Financial Analysts Journal, 80(3), 202-220.
[11] Zulfa, M. (2025). The Anchor of Stability: How GCG Protects Institutional Shareholders in Volatile Markets. Journal of Accounting and Strategic Management, 17(2), 134-150.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Rieneke Ryke Kalalo, Hugo Prasetyo Winotoatmojo, Wiljan Atfentia Kotngoran, Heppi Syofya, I Gusti Made Riko Hendrajana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
