The bill called CLARITY, which envisions comprehensive regulation of digital asset markets in the United States, is not expected to make progress in the Senate Banking Committee before April. Behind the delay are not only technical disagreements, but also political priorities and calendar constraints.
Legislative Agenda Priorities and the Role of the White House
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, in his statement on the subject, stated that the bill’s proceedings would not be brought forward and that other legal regulations were prioritized in this process. It is stated that US President Donald Trump has made the voter ID regulation called SAVE America a prerequisite for all other laws that will be presented to him. For this reason, it was announced that a new session is not foreseen in the Banking Committee’s calendar regarding the CLARITY bill and that there will be no progress before April.
Different Speeds in Different Committees in Congress
The CLARITY bill, known as the Digital Asset Market Structure Act, is advancing at different speeds in different committees in the US Congress. The House of Representatives passed the bill in mid-2025 with a broad bipartisan majority. But in the Senate, the Agriculture Committee passed its version in early 2026 amid largely party divisions. The Banking Committee postponed the session planned to be held in January 2026 and suspended the process. This session, currently pending in the Senate Banking Committee, remains the biggest obstacle to sending the bill to the general assembly.
Stablecoin Yield Tension Continues
Another important factor in obstructing the legal process is sectoral disagreements. The return opportunities offered through stablecoin products lead to a difference of opinion between traditional banking and the crypto ecosystem. Banks argue that crypto companies offering interest or returns on stablecoins could cause deposits to shift from traditional banking to digital assets. There are concerns that high-yield stablecoins will weaken the competitiveness of classical banking.
Senators Angela Alsobrooks and Thom Tillis are working on compromise language that would make it possible to distinguish between passive interest payments and rewards tied to specific user actions. However, there is no clarity among both the industry and lawmakers about what the legal and economic consequences of this distinction will be. It is reported that the negotiations between the parties have not reached a certain result yet.
Expectations of Market Actors and JPMorgan
Despite all these delays, optimism stands out in the market that the regulation will come into force in the coming period. According to JPMorgan’s analysis, the adoption of the law, especially in the second half of 2026, could stand out as an important catalyst for large institutional investors. The regulation in question will clarify whether digital assets will be treated as securities or commodities and which institution will regulate which activities. Without this clarity, large-scale capital groups are considered unable to meaningfully participate in the market.
Recent developments do not actually change the expectation of regulatory clarity, they only postpone the timetable and create uncertainty over the time period for the law to be enacted. The possibility of submitting it for signature before the end of 2026 remains, especially if the Banking Committee sessions are rescheduled in April or May and the drafts are combined with the House of Representatives in the summer. On the other hand, every month the process is delayed increases the risk of new obstacles to the law on the political agenda.
