Cryptocurrency exchange leader opposes indefinite postponement of the US Clarity Act bill

U.S. Cryptocurrency Regulatory Legislation Faces Setback Again. The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, originally scheduled for detailed review on January 15, was suddenly halted at the last minute, with the Senate Banking Committee deciding to indefinitely postpone the review timetable. This important bill, which affects the entire crypto industry’s prospects, has fallen into deadlock due to irreconcilable interests among industry players, banks, and politics.

As a leading enterprise among cryptocurrency exchanges, Coinbase’s change of stance became the catalyst for this turmoil. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong sharply criticized on Wednesday via platform X, pointing out that the new draft is filled with destructive provisions for the industry, including restrictions on tokenized stock development, prohibitive regulations on DeFi, expanded government access to personal financial records, and limits on stablecoin yields.

From Industry Consensus to a Turnaround: Why Did the Clarity Act Fail?

Senator Tim Scott, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and a Republican, confirmed the bill’s postponement but did not disclose a new review date. In a statement, Scott said: “I have had extensive discussions with leaders across the crypto industry and the financial sector, and all parties have engaged in negotiations in good faith. This bill reflects months of bipartisan deliberation.” While his words acknowledged the effort for bipartisan cooperation, they also hinted that the disagreements are deeper than expected.

Originally seen as a key step toward establishing order in the crypto market, the Clarity Act sparked widespread division over implementation details. The most contentious issue was the stablecoin yield mechanism, which became the biggest point of dispute. According to informed sources, this clause triggered objections from multiple bipartisan lawmakers, and even within the Republican Party, consensus was hard to reach. Scott could not guarantee that all Republicans would vote in favor.

A Triangular Dilemma: Bank Interests vs Political Calculations vs Industry Needs

On the surface, Coinbase’s opposition appears to have caused the bill’s delay, but the underlying reasons are far more complex. The resistance from the banking sector was unexpectedly strong, surpassing the expectations of all involved in the negotiations. As representatives of traditional finance, banks firmly oppose innovative products like stablecoins, directly opposing the crypto exchanges’ goal of clear regulation.

The political game between the Democrats and the White House adds another layer of uncertainty. Democratic lawmakers insist on including strict “ethics clauses” in the bill to restrict government officials from profiting from the crypto industry. This provision is widely seen as targeting Trump and his family’s crypto ventures, especially the recently active World Liberty Financial. However, these proposals have repeatedly faced resistance from the White House during negotiations, as they threaten to interfere with its own crypto strategies.

Subsequently, Scott issued a statement transferring the issue to the Senate Ethics Committee, claiming it was outside the jurisdiction of the Banking Committee. This decision effectively put a halt to the political dispute but also implicitly acknowledged that the conflicts between ethics clauses and the bill itself are difficult to reconcile.

Years of Investment in Limbo: How Can the Crypto Industry Break Through?

Crypto exchanges and industry stakeholders have invested heavily in promoting this legislation, pouring enormous sums into political donations and lobbying over the years, hoping the Clarity Act would become a milestone for U.S. crypto regulation and compliance. Now, facing a setback just before the finish line, the industry is shaken.

However, all hope is not lost. The Senate Agriculture Committee has also decided to postpone its related crypto legislation review until the end of the month, with the possibility of merging efforts. But the setback in the Banking Committee undoubtedly casts a shadow over the future of U.S. crypto legislation, making subsequent negotiations more difficult and potentially further intensifying the conflict between the crypto industry and traditional finance.