Committee Readies Revised CLARITY Act
The US Senate Agriculture Committee is set to publish its draft of the Digital Asset Markets Clarity (CLARITY) Act by end of business Wednesday, following a stalled markup in the Senate Banking Committee. Chair John Boozman confirmed that the committee will proceed with its version of the bill, with a markup hearing scheduled for the following Tuesday. The Agriculture Committee’s legislation will focus on establishing a comprehensive framework for digital asset market structure, trading venues and product definitions.
Key Points of Contention
Lawmakers continue to debate provisions on decentralized finance, ethics and stablecoin yield. Senate Democrats have advocated for stricter DeFi regulations, while industry stakeholders such as Coinbase withdrew support for the banking committee’s bill over concerns that it would eliminate stablecoin rewards. Questions remain over how to balance innovation with investor protections and systemic risk mitigation.
Political Dynamics
White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt underscored the inevitability of a market structure bill, warning against assuming a multi-trillion-dollar industry can operate indefinitely without clear rules. With midterm elections looming, Senate Republicans may seek bipartisan support to advance the legislation. North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis previously indicated that lawmakers have until early February to pass crypto legislation before midterm campaigning intensifies.
Industry Implications
Passage of a digital asset market structure bill would clarify regulatory authority over spot trading venues, stablecoin issuance and token depositories. Defined rules could facilitate institutional participation, attract liquidity and reduce compliance uncertainty. However, added DeFi restrictions could reshape emerging onchain protocols, requiring projects to adapt to new compliance requirements. Market participants will closely watch Senate committee proceedings for indicators of the final legislative language and potential compromises.
Comments (0)