Ew, I mean, I guess the "tactical framing" of this could help push Bitcoin into a legitimized light (in terms of optics only), but this is a pretty trashy law.

"The bill said Panama would launch an official digital wallet, similar to El Salvador’s Chivo app, to allow residents to 'carry out transactions of these new technologies in a safe way.'"

This a custodial solution created by the government. El Salvador did this as to ease the acceptance of Bitcoin from merchants that wanted dollars. The only reason I can understand for Panama doing this, is for control.

All the talking points are trash too. Maybe I have a skewed view on this being from a country where you can buy a zombie chain if you wanted, but there doesn't seem to be anything about this law that has any impact other than optics, and yet the talking points in the article...I don't know are just talking points for having them banned?

"Cannon also told Fortune that the move by Panama would undermine the U.K. government’s assertion that cryptocurrencies are not official currencies, and could therefore undermine the British law that says any gains made on crypto are liable to tax."

No it won't. The El Salvador law should have done that, but it apparently didn't. So the Panama law as I understand it from this article, is not a strong in terms of optics or legal implications as the El Salvador law.

Thank you for sharing though.