【Crypto World】A 278-page bipartisan joint proposal—the “CLARITY Act”—was recently released and immediately drew a lot of criticism. The criticism points to the possibility that the bill favors large institutions such as major exchanges and payment service providers.
Entrepreneur Aaron Day and others express core concerns: the bill imposes strict compliance standards for real-time monitoring, exchange registration, and asset custody. On the surface, it may seem manageable, but in reality? The costs behind these requirements are prohibitively high. Small and medium-sized startups and emerging platforms simply can’t afford it, ultimately benefiting giants with ample capital and operational systems, leading to a more entrenched market landscape.
What’s even more worrying is that the bill also plans to extend registration obligations to DeFi developers. It’s important to remember that permissionless operation is the foundation of DeFi. What does it mean if this line is crossed? Innovation space shrinks, startup costs skyrocket, and many early-stage projects could die before birth. From a broader perspective, this regulatory approach may drift away from the decentralization spirit advocated by Bitcoin.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
15 Likes
Reward
15
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
SurvivorshipBias
· 2h ago
Coming again? Do regulatory authorities really want to kill DeFi... Without licenses, the core is gone. Is this still called DeFi?
It's just helping leading institutions monopolize. Raising costs, who will bother to develop new projects? Innovation can only die.
A bloody rule of 278 pages of paper piled up, each page choking the neck of small entrepreneurs...
Talking about compliance standards, ultimately it's about building new moats to keep retail investors out.
The funny thing is, big institutions still have ways to pass, but the ones suffering are the tech people...
In the end, this regulatory sword cuts the vitality of the entire ecosystem.
View OriginalReply0
HashBard
· 19h ago
ngl this is just regulatory capture with extra steps... 278 pages of beautifully crafted gatekeeping disguised as "consumer protection" lmao. the irony? small builders get crushed while coinbase pops champagne
Reply0
RamenDeFiSurvivor
· 19h ago
Here comes the pump and dump again, 278 pages of paper just a tool to raise funds.
It's the old trick, big institutions draft regulations to stifle small players first.
This is turning DeFi into CeFi. Without permission, is it still DeFi?
It's ridiculous. A bunch of compliance costs are being thrown in—who can survive?
It's the classic big fish eating small fish scenario. Regulations are really annoying.
View OriginalReply0
ProbablyNothing
· 19h ago
Another bill to harvest retail investors... 278 pages just to give big players a green light.
It's just the big fish eating the small fish approach. Who will cover the compliance costs for small and medium projects?
All permissionless DeFi needs to register? Then what is it called DeFi... just turn it into banking directly.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainDecoder
· 19h ago
According to research, this type of high-threshold compliance framework indeed has structural biases. From a technical perspective, the core value proposition of permissionless DeFi lies in decentralized decision-making. Once a registration system is introduced, it fundamentally changes the system architecture. It is worth noting that every such turning point in history has led to innovation migration.
View OriginalReply0
RektButStillHere
· 20h ago
Page 278 of the notes is just to let the big shots win effortlessly? I really can't hold back from thinking this logic is a bit too much.
It's the same old trick again—nominally regulating the market, but in reality just raising the barriers to push small players out of the game.
Without permission, DeFi isn't really DeFi anymore; just rename it CeFi and be done with it.
Once this bill passes, small developers won't even have a place to cry.
Just the registration fees alone could drain the startup fund. The Federal Reserve's combination punches are truly ruthless.
The "CLARITY Act" Sparks Controversy: Will High Regulatory Thresholds Stifle DeFi Innovation?
【Crypto World】A 278-page bipartisan joint proposal—the “CLARITY Act”—was recently released and immediately drew a lot of criticism. The criticism points to the possibility that the bill favors large institutions such as major exchanges and payment service providers.
Entrepreneur Aaron Day and others express core concerns: the bill imposes strict compliance standards for real-time monitoring, exchange registration, and asset custody. On the surface, it may seem manageable, but in reality? The costs behind these requirements are prohibitively high. Small and medium-sized startups and emerging platforms simply can’t afford it, ultimately benefiting giants with ample capital and operational systems, leading to a more entrenched market landscape.
What’s even more worrying is that the bill also plans to extend registration obligations to DeFi developers. It’s important to remember that permissionless operation is the foundation of DeFi. What does it mean if this line is crossed? Innovation space shrinks, startup costs skyrocket, and many early-stage projects could die before birth. From a broader perspective, this regulatory approach may drift away from the decentralization spirit advocated by Bitcoin.