The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (CLARITY Act), which aims to create a comprehensive legal framework for the digital asset market in the USA, has brought the search for clarity in the crypto sector back to the agenda. Discussions about the bill were divided into two on the questions of what this regulation brings and who it benefits.
Corporate Participation and Market Clarity
The CLARITY Act aims to introduce clear rules at the federal level, replacing the current regulatory process that is shaped by courts and different interpretations. Law; It aims to clarify areas such as how digital assets will be classified, who will have oversight responsibility, and under what legal framework tokens and intermediary institutions will be evaluated.
JPMorgan argues that such regulation could make the environment more predictable for institutional investors by the second half of 2026. It is stated that clear rules will facilitate compliance preparations for large actors such as banks and brokers and increase institutional interest in digital assets. According to JPMorgan’s analysis, this legal framework is expected to reduce uncertainty in the market, opening the door to growth in new areas such as tokenization.
On the other hand, if the bill is passed this year, financial institutions will be able to make plans for compliance with the legislation by the end of the year. Thus, regulations may have a direct impact on the market structure by the end of the year.
Anti-Innovation Criticisms and Concerns for Entrepreneurs
Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson warns that the bill could lead to most new crypto projects automatically starting as securities. According to Hoskinson, leaving the decision on whether projects are securities or not entirely at the discretion of the SEC may hinder innovative initiatives in the sector.
“A bad law legislates whatever Gary Gensler wants to do to the industry. A bad law gives the SEC the ability to arbitrarily shut down any new project. A bad law imposes personal liability on all DeFi developers and destroys liquidity for those without government approval.”
Hoskinson stated that such an approach could also create retrospective problems for large projects in the past, and suggested that the biggest risk is that in the future, founders will find it more attractive to start new projects outside the USA. According to him, this could weaken the US’s case for attracting blockchain developers.
Stablecoin Rewards Controversy
One of the biggest topics of discussion in Washington about the current bill was stablecoin rewards. In this regulation, the issue of whether stablecoin issuing companies or related platforms can offer returns to their users is of key importance.
Crypto firms want regulation to be flexible to enable stablecoin-based return programs, while banks worry that such products will rival the traditional deposit system. According to banks, users who earn high returns from stablecoins withdrawing their deposits from banks may complicate funding sources and the functioning of monetary policy.
This conflict is no longer an innovation debate in the field of crypto, but is also being followed carefully in terms of its effects on financial stability and the banking system. While the authorities remain distant from giving direct interest on stablecoin balances, crypto companies continue to look for ways to provide indirect income through various membership, reward and staking-like structures.
This aspect of the bill could have significant consequences not only for the crypto market but also for the broader financial sector.
Possible Scenarios and Uncertainties in the Market
If the CLARITY Law is implemented, it is expected that regulated platforms and corporate service providers will gain an advantage in the short term. Alternatively, if the law imposes strict restrictions on stablecoin rewards, it is possible that demand will shift to new structures such as tokenized deposits or money market funds, resulting in a temporary increase in interest in decentralized finance.
If the law is not enacted or significantly delayed, the uncertainty that industry players complain about will continue and this may cause new projects to be established in other geographies. It is claimed that this uncertainty will have an impact on which countries the entrepreneurial activity will shift to, rather than market prices.
