Who Has Authority to Move My Bitcoin as a Dual-Domain Question
Legal and Technical Authority to Move Holdings
This memo is published by CustodyStress, an independent Bitcoin custody stress test that produces reference documents for individuals, families, and professionals.
Legal Authority Defined
Someone wants to understand who can move their bitcoin. They ask who has authority to move my bitcoin because they want clarity about control. The question surfaces during estate planning, custody review, or when establishing arrangements with others. They want to know who has permission and who has capability to access their bitcoin.
What follows covers how this question operates in two separate domains: legal authority and technical capability. Legal authority defines who has permission under the law. Technical capability defines who can actually produce a valid signature. These domains operate independently. The person with legal authority may lack technical capability. The person with technical capability may lack legal authority. The question has two different answers that may point to different people.
Legal Authority Defined
Legal authority comes from recognized relationships and documents. The owner has authority over their own property. A spouse may have community property rights. An executor has authority after death through probate appointment. A trustee has authority over trust assets through the trust instrument. A power of attorney grants authority to an agent.
These legal authorities exist within the legal system. Courts recognize them. Institutions honor them. They determine who is permitted to act with an asset and who faces consequences for acting without permission.
Legal authority can be documented and verified. Papers can be checked. Court records can be consulted. The chain of authority from owner to authorized person can be traced through documents. This traceability is central to how legal authority functions.
The legal answer to who has authority depends on what documents exist, what relationships are recognized, and what events have occurred. Different circumstances produce different legal answers. After death, the executor has authority. During incapacity, the power of attorney agent may have authority. While the owner is alive and capable, they typically have exclusive authority.
Technical Capability Defined
Technical capability comes from possessing the cryptographic materials needed to sign transactions. Whoever knows the seed phrase can derive the private keys. Whoever holds the hardware wallet with the PIN can produce signatures. Whoever has the passphrase adds another layer of access. Technical capability is about possession and knowledge, not legal status.
The bitcoin network does not check legal authority. It checks cryptographic validity. A valid signature moves bitcoin regardless of whether the signer had legal permission. An invalid signature fails regardless of how much legal authority the signer claims. The network runs on mathematics, not law.
Technical capability can exist without anyone knowing about it. Someone may have found and memorized a seed phrase without the owner's knowledge. They have technical capability even though no document grants it and no legal relationship authorizes it. Their capability is invisible until exercised.
The technical answer to who can move bitcoin depends on who possesses the access materials. This answer may be clear to the holder or may be uncertain. The holder may not know who has copies of the seed phrase, who has guessed the PIN, or who might access their backup locations. Technical capability may extend beyond the holder's awareness.
The Mismatch in Practice
Legal authority and technical capability rarely align perfectly. The people with legal authority often do not have technical capability. The people with technical capability may not have legal authority. This mismatch creates confusion about who actually can move bitcoin.
A named executor has legal authority over estate assets including bitcoin. Unless the deceased provided the seed phrase or other access materials, the executor lacks technical capability. Their authority is real but ineffective. They are legally permitted to move the bitcoin but cannot actually do it.
A technical consultant who helped set up custody may have technical capability. They may have seen the seed phrase or configured the hardware. Unless they have a documented relationship granting authority, they lack legal authority. They could move the bitcoin but have no permission to do so.
The holder themselves may be in the clearest position—they typically have both legal authority as the owner and technical capability as the custodian. But even this alignment can break down if the holder forgets access materials, loses hardware, or becomes incapacitated without arranging handover.
Authority Without Capability
Having legal authority without technical capability creates a frustrating position. The person is permitted to act but cannot act. Their authority exists on paper but translates to nothing on the blockchain.
This situation commonly appears in estate administration. The executor is named. The court confirms their appointment. They have every legal document needed. But the deceased left no access instructions. The executor's authority cannot bridge the gap to the bitcoin. They wait, search, hope for access materials to surface.
It also appears with trustees. The trust clearly names them and grants powers over trust property. The bitcoin sits in the trust. The trustee has authority. But the grantor did not coordinate access. The trustee holds an empty title over bitcoin they cannot touch.
Authority without capability may still have legal consequences. The person with authority may be responsible for the asset they cannot access. They may owe duties to beneficiaries they cannot fulfill. The authority creates obligations while capability remains absent. The gap produces stress without providing solutions.
Capability Without Authority
Having technical capability without legal authority creates a different problem. The person can act but is not permitted to act. Moving the bitcoin would be technically easy but legally problematic.
This situation appears when access materials spread beyond authorized people. A family member who was shown the seed phrase during a casual conversation has capability. Unless documents grant them authority, they lack permission to use what they know.
It also appears with service providers or consultants. Someone who helped set up custody may retain capability through memory or notes. Their professional relationship may have ended without their knowledge of access materials ending. They could act but have no legal basis to act.
Capability without authority can lead to disputes. If someone moves bitcoin without legal authority, questions arise about theft, conversion, or breach of duty. The ease of technical action contrasts with the legal complications that follow. The capability that seems like access is actually exposure to liability.
Mapping Both Domains
Answering who has authority to move bitcoin requires mapping both domains separately. The legal domain asks: who is legally permitted? The technical domain asks: who can actually do it? Complete understanding requires both answers.
The legal map traces documents and relationships. Who is named in the will? Who has power of attorney? What does the trust say? What community property rules apply? This mapping produces a list of people with legal permission under various scenarios.
The technical map traces access materials. Who has the seed phrase? Who knows the passphrase? Who has the hardware wallet PIN? Where are backups stored and who can reach them? This mapping produces a list of people with actual capability.
Comparing the two maps reveals alignment and gaps. Where the same person appears on both maps, authority and capability align. Where different people appear, a gap exists. The gaps indicate where legal permission does not translate to technical ability, or where technical ability exists without legal permission.
Changes Over Time
Both authority and capability can change over time, and they may change independently. Legal authority shifts with life events—marriage, divorce, death, document updates. Technical capability shifts with custody changes—new hardware, new passphrases, lost access materials.
A person who once had both authority and capability may lose one or the other. A spouse with community property authority may lose capability after the holder changes custody without telling them. A person who had technical access may lose authority through changed documents they do not know about.
New people may gain authority or capability without the holder realizing. A successor trustee named in documents has authority even if the holder forgot they were named. Someone who discovers a backup has capability even if the holder does not know the backup was found.
These independent changes mean the answer to who has authority shifts without anyone updating a central record. The holder may believe the answer is one thing while reality has shifted. The discrepancy surfaces only when someone tries to act and discovers their authority or capability has changed.
Conclusion
The question of who has authority to move my bitcoin operates in two separate domains. Legal authority defines who has permission under law—determined by ownership, documents, and recognized relationships. Technical capability defines who can produce valid signatures—determined by possession of seed phrases, hardware, and access materials.
These domains operate independently. Legal authority does not create technical capability. Technical capability does not create legal authority. The people with permission may differ from the people with capability. Mismatches between the two create situations where permitted people cannot act and capable people lack permission.
Complete understanding requires mapping both domains. Legal authority traces through documents and relationships. Technical capability traces through access materials and knowledge. Both maps can change over time independently. The full answer to the question depends on examining both domains and seeing where they align and where they diverge.
System Context
Examining Bitcoin Custody Under Stress
The Authority-Access Gap in Bitcoin Custody
Who Can Legally Act on My Bitcoin If Incapacitated
For anyone who holds Bitcoin — on an exchange, in a wallet, through a service, or in self-custody — and wants to know what happens to it if something happens to them.
Start Bitcoin Custody Stress Test$179 · 12-month access · Unlimited assessments
A structured, scenario-based diagnostic that produces reference documents for your spouse, executor, or attorney — no accounts connected, no keys shared.
Sample what the assessment produces