The U.S. Senate Banking Committee recently provided a detailed interpretation of the CLARITY Act, clarifying several misconceptions circulating in the market. This statement sends a significant signal to the entire crypto ecosystem.

First, this bill is not a complete overhaul. It builds upon the existing securities law framework, primarily supplementing the standards for determining digital assets—what constitutes a security and what is a commodity. This clarification aims to reduce regulatory gray areas.

Second, it is fundamentally an investor protection document. By establishing a clear regulatory system, the bill seeks to combat fraud and market manipulation, preventing a collapse like FTX from happening again. From this perspective, even if it constrains innovation, the starting point is risk prevention.

The issue of power division has also been clarified. The bill delineates the regulatory boundaries of the SEC and CFTC and sets up a joint advisory committee to coordinate enforcement. This approach helps fill existing regulatory gaps and introduces anti-avoidance clauses to significantly limit regulatory arbitrage.

Regarding anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing, the bill requires intermediaries to fulfill relevant obligations, strengthen sanctions compliance capabilities, and grants the Treasury Department enforcement authority. These are standard financial security measures.

On DeFi, the clarification emphasizes that the bill does not allow it to become an illegal money transfer channel. The strategy is targeted enforcement—centralized intermediaries interacting with DeFi protocols need to implement risk management standards, while platforms that are truly decentralized will face specific rules. The core idea is to protect the code itself and genuine innovation.

Of particular interest are the protections for developers. The bill explicitly states that software developers who only publish or maintain code and do not control user funds will not be classified as financial intermediaries. Users’ self-custody rights are also legally recognized. Of course, this does not mean regulators have no tools—when genuine risks arise, they still retain intervention capabilities.

Finally, the core driving force of the bill is quite clear: strengthen national security, protect investors’ interests, and promote compliant innovation within a clear regulatory framework. This is not a tailored policy for a specific industry but a systematic effort to establish order. This approach could also serve as a reference for global regulatory trends.