2026-01-16 17:41:07

#美国民主党BlueVault The New Variables in Crypto Regulation—The CLARITY Act Hurdle

Recently, the US-proposed CLARITY Act has become a hot topic in the industry. In simple terms, it is legislation regarding how crypto assets should be regulated in the US, covering exchanges, banks, stablecoins, and multiple other aspects.

Initially, it was expected to advance further on January 15th (committee review stage), but the timeline was pushed back. Why? Because opinions from different parties are too divergent.

**Attitude from the Banking Sector**

The banking industry is mainly unhappy about one thing—if exchanges develop financial products or interest-bearing products based on stablecoins, it directly threatens their traditional deposit business. In plain words, it’s a threat to their livelihood.

**Position from Exchanges**

A CEO of a leading exchange is more aggressive. He opposed several points at once: restrictions on tokenized stocks and securities, DeFi-related regulations, and the stablecoin yield mechanisms being hindered. He even boldly stated, "Better no bill than a bad bill"—a very straightforward attitude. He also pointed out a critical issue: the government cannot use this as an excuse to mine users’ financial data.

**Voices from the Political Sphere**

Some factions within the Democratic Party and regulatory hawks have proposed a different logic—they believe this draft does not sufficiently protect investors.

**The Most Painful Contradiction**

Ironically, the stablecoin provisions have become the biggest battleground. Banks feel the provisions are too lax, while exchanges think they are too strict. Both sides oppose, and the bill is stuck at this point.

Currently, the CLARITY Act remains deadlocked, and when it might be unblocked is still uncertain. Given this multi-party tug-of-war, it’s expected that the stalemate will continue in the short term.

DEFI2,85%

View Original

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SandwichTrader

· 22h ago

Banks are fighting each other over exchanges, and stablecoins have become the sandwich filling... This bill probably won't have a chance in the short term.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-4745f9ce

· 22h ago

Banks and exchanges are undermining each other, and we're caught in the middle. This bill is probably going to fall through again. Stablecoins are the biggest bottleneck, and no one is satisfied.

View OriginalReply0

NftMetaversePainter

· 22h ago

nah this is exactly the algorithmic deadlock i've been theorizing about—when institutional interests collide through legislative frameworks, the blockchain primitives become collateral damage. classic gatekeeping.

Reply0

TokenomicsPolice

· 22h ago

It's the same old trick again, banks and exchanges fighting each other, and in the end, retail investors are the ones who suffer. Stablecoins have really become a hot potato; neither side is satisfied, so it just gets stuck, a typical failure of political compromise. Honestly, whether this bill passes or not doesn't really matter; what's important is who can profit from it... Why is it always like this? Can the lawmakers really come to an agreement? It feels like it's always repeating itself. The exchange CEO's words sound tough, but the reality is that the decision has already been made. We have to wait again, it's really ridiculous.

View OriginalReply0

SellLowExpert

· 22h ago

Banks and exchanges are fighting each other, and the stablecoin provisions have become the sandwich filling. This bill will probably have to wait another year.

View OriginalReply0

Blockwatcher9000

· 22h ago

It's the same old trick again, banks and exchanges blame each other, and in the end, it's us retail investors who suffer. The stablecoin terms are really laughable, sometimes too loose, sometimes too strict. Why can't they come up with a version that individuals can understand? Instead of waiting for legislation, it's better to get on board and make a move. Anyway, policy changes in the US won't affect our wallets. The name CLARITY Act sounds fake; it doesn't clarify anything at all. That CEO's statement is spot on. It's better not to have legislation than to ruin it, but the problem is they simply can't hear our voices. It's being delayed again. How long will it take to get through? Are there opportunities in other countries? Government data mining is really upsetting. Using the guise of regulation to conduct financial surveillance—this is something we need to be cautious about.

View OriginalReply0