The U.S. Congress originally intended to establish a unified regulatory framework for digital assets through the Clarity Act, but progress in the Senate has clearly slowed. As the recess begins and available time for deliberation diminishes, market expectations for the bill’s enactment by 2026 have rapidly cooled. Meanwhile, the SEC, FASB, and OCC have each initiated rulemaking processes, signaling that U.S. crypto regulation is shifting toward a path of “independent agency advancement.”
Senate time window narrows
The probability of the Clarity Act becoming law by 2026 on Polymarket has dropped from 82% in February to 16% by early August. Galaxy Digital also reduced its estimated passage probability to 10% in its report on August 14, primarily citing an overcrowded Senate schedule.
The bill passed the House in July 2025 by a vote of 294, and was subsequently advanced by the Senate Banking Committee on May 14, 2026, by a vote of 15 to 9. However, the bill remains stalled over three key disagreements, and the Senate did not schedule a vote before adjourning in August.
- House passage date: July 2025
- Senate Banking Committee vote: 15 to 9
- Only 14 working days remain after the resumption on September 14.
Three issues remain unresolved.
The first point of contention is stablecoin yields. The current text proposes prohibiting the direct or indirect provision of yields on stablecoin balances, as well as arrangements economically equivalent to interest on bank deposits. This provision would directly impact Coinbase and Circle’s business model centered on USDC rewards. Reports indicate that the associated revenue amounts to approximately $1.35 billion annually.
The second point of contention is the classification of DeFi protocols. The bill requires defining which protocols can be deemed sufficiently decentralized to avoid registration and regulation by the SEC as traditional issuers. Democrats and Republicans have yet to reach agreement on issues such as governance token distribution, code modifiability, upgrade permissions, and control over treasury funds.
The third controversy concerns ethical constraints on government officials operating cryptocurrency businesses, with the key dispute centering on whether the state attorney general or the U.S. Department of Justice should assume primary enforcement responsibility. The report notes that this issue also involves Trump-related cryptocurrency income, making it politically sensitive.
Three institutions have each moved forward independently.
As congressional progress slows, multiple U.S. agencies have begun establishing their own regulations independently. On August 14, the SEC proposed "Regulation Crypto Assets," providing a pathway for eligible digital asset projects to raise funds without triggering full registration requirements. The proposal is currently open for public comment.
FASB proposed an accounting treatment on August 18 to classify eligible stablecoins as cash equivalents, with a comment period ending on November 19. If implemented, this change would directly affect how stablecoins are presented on corporate balance sheets.
Regarding OCC, draft regulations under the GENIUS Act are being prepared, covering who may issue payment stablecoins and what requirements reserve assets must meet. Reports indicate that the final rules are expected to be completed by November 2026, approximately four months after the statutory deadline.
The unified framework faces replacement.
The Clarity Act originally sought to classify digital assets into securities, digital commodities, and stablecoins, assigning oversight to the SEC, CFTC, and prudential regulators respectively, while addressing gaps in token conversions, disclosure requirements, and applicable standards for decentralized protocols.
If the bill ultimately fails to pass, U.S. cryptocurrency regulation will rely more heavily on individual agencies setting rules independently: the SEC will handle securities characteristics, the CFTC will oversee commodity aspects, the OCC and the Treasury Department will advance stablecoin regulation, and the FASB will determine accounting standards. This would result not in a single unified framework, but in a regulatory system pieced together by multiple agencies.