The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (H.R. 3633) stalled in the U.S. Senate after leaders postponed a planned markup on Jan. 15, following intense industry pushback and late changes to the bill.
Senators released an amended draft on Jan. 12, but the planned Jan. 15 markup was pushed back after major stakeholders, led by Coinbase, withdrew support. Coinbase’s CEO signalled the revised text had “critical flaws,” a move that undercut bipartisan momentum and intensified scrutiny of provisions that shift authority between the SEC and the CFTC.
The Senate draft prohibits direct interest payments on stablecoins while allowing activity-based rewards, a distinction that opponents warn would eliminate a material revenue stream for crypto firms and invite pushback from the banking lobby.
The Treasury has estimated up to $6.6 trillion in bank deposits could be at risk if third-party yield inducements persist, a figure cited repeatedly in debates over the bill’s stablecoin language.
Lawmakers and industry sources also clashed over DeFi oversight and data access: critics warned the draft could expand government reach into decentralized protocol data by folding certain protocols into Bank Secrecy Act and AML regimes. Ethics provisions — including rules on public officials holding or profiting from crypto assets — added a further layer of dispute.
Market reaction and regulatory friction
The delay produced immediate market ripples. U.S.-focused digital-asset funds posted their first weekly outflows in a month, totaling $952 million, and public crypto firms suffered share-price declines: Coinbase fell about 6.5% and Robinhood nearly 8% after the Senate postponed the vote. Those moves reflected investor concern that the legislative window for comprehensive clarity may narrow further in 2026.
Fundamental differences remain between the House-passed CLARITY Act (July 2025) and the Senate Banking Committee draft. The House broadly classified major tokens as “digital commodities” under CFTC oversight and included explicit protections for self-custody.
The Senate draft uses alternate terms and decentralization tests that could tilt primary enforcement toward the SEC, creating definitional ambiguity that complicates compliance design for product teams and custodians.
Lynn Turner, a former SEC chief accountant, warned the bill in its current form “could precipitate future market instability,” a concern echoed by state regulators and the North American Securities Administrators Association, which flagged inconsistent asset definitions and investor-protection gaps.
Senate leaders have not secured the votes to advance the bill, and the Senate Agriculture Committee has pushed its own markup into the last week of January 2026, which will shape the reconciliation process with the House-passed text. Investors and compliance teams should monitor upcoming amendments on stablecoin yield rules and the tests for decentralization — those changes will determine costs, access and licensing requirements for exchanges, funds and custody providers.
