President Donald Trump has made a prominent campaign to defend US Bitcoin mining. but, The nation’s leading publicly traded crypto miners report sudden losses in the first quarter of 2025.
According to analysts estimate, Even after Bitcoin surged to an all-time high of over $109,000 in January, seven of the eight largest mining mining companies in the US are expected to incur losses in the first quarter.
Key crypto prices for quarter were around 75% higher than the first quarter of 2024. Still, the profitability of the industry is declining.
Brian Dobson, managing director of Clear Street’s disruptive technology equity research, said the sector is battling margin compression and lower revenue despite bullish Bitcoin prices. He kept saying that it would be a difficult quarter for Bitcoin miners as global difficulty levels increased.
Eight miners saw a collectively adjusted net profit swing, ranging from a $1.1 billion profit in the first quarter of 2024 to a $190 million loss in the first quarter of 2025, or a drop of nearly $1.3 billion.
Bitcoin miners narrow down the difficulty of rising tariffs and record mining
Intensified competition, increased operating costs and narrowing capital led to a sharp decline in total profits for the top eight US Bitcoin mining companies.
The difficulty of mining Bitcoin, a measure of total computing power exclusively for mining blocks on a network, is at the highest level ever, further digging into profitability per block.
One of the key challenges is tariff hiking, primarily targeting Bitcoin mining hardware sourced from Asia. These tariffs, part of Trump’s broader trade war agenda, have significantly increased procurement costs.
Ethan Bela, the COO of Mining Services Company Luxor Technology, said if these Trump tariffs rise further, it would erode the return profile and slow growth.
The rise in scrutiny at the US border caused delays in equipment shipments earlier this year after the blacklisting of Bitmain affiliate Xiamen Sophgo Technologies Ltd. was blacklisted by the Department of Commerce.
Trump’s Code Promises Promises to Clash with Trade Wars, Debt Dependence, Half Fallout
Trump has pledged to “promote America’s BTC production” with his claims as a code-friendly leader in the 2024 run. However, mining has primarily become a scapegoat for a variety of grand trade and economic policies that have negatively affected profits.
“Trump declared, “We’ll make all the bitcoins in the US,” but tariffs and geopolitical tensions went straight to the hands of foreigners,” Bella said. “The trade war for Trump is the most important thing.”
As the broader stock market rebounds from post-election highs, public miners face a decline in their desire to sell stocks, floating instead towards debt. Companies such as Mara Holdings, Riot Platforms and CleanSpark are increasingly relying on convertible bonds and credit facilities for liquidity.
According to Vera, large miners are hesitant to sell their stocks in the current market due to high costs, and debt is now considered a more affordable option to raise capital.
The financial squeeze was exacerbated by Bitcoin’s April 2024 half, reducing block rewards from 6.25 to 3.125 BTC. With energy prices rising in several US states, mining reward reductions have a deep impact on final revenue.
CleanSpark stands alone as US miners suffer from losses and global pressure
Of the eight top US Bitcoin miners, only CleanSpark Inc. is expected to report first quarter profits. Riot Platforms, one of the largest players in the industry, is projected to report both losses and revenue declines later on Thursday.
With international operations from Russia to China, American miners are squeezed in all aspects by rapidly expanding and gaining cost advantage amidst US policy headwinds.
Dobson said the management team is hesitant to plan a long-term strategy if tariff conditions could change in the months.
As the first quarter revenue reports emerge, it is clear that US crypto miners, even with White House support, are not immune to global economic strength, competitive pressures and inconsistencies in domestic policy.
