Washington pushes CLARITY Act
U.S. regulators and policy insiders are publicly urging Congress to pass the CLARITY Act to create a formal legal map for crypto markets, arguing clearer rules will let institutions build compliant exchanges, custody and tokenization plumbing. SEC chair Paul Atkins and other figures framed the bill as the switch from enforcement theatre to market‑structure implementation, which could convert legal optionality into distribution advantages for incumbents already building compliant rails. (thecoinrepublic.com) (capitalaidaily.com)
Washington is trying to turn crypto from a lawsuit problem into a plumbing project. On April 8, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent urged Congress to pass the CLARITY Act, and Securities and Exchange Commission chair Paul Atkins has been publicly pushing the same direction in recent days. (usnews.com) (coindesk.com) The bill is not new. The House of Representatives already passed the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 on July 17, 2025 by a 294-134 vote, and the Senate received it on September 18, 2025, where it has been sitting in the Banking Committee. (congress.gov) (govtrack.us) What Congress is arguing about is basic mapmaking. The bill says the Commodity Futures Trading Commission would take the lead over “digital commodities” and their exchanges, brokers, and dealers, while the Securities and Exchange Commission would keep authority over fundraising deals and tokenized securities. (congress.gov 1) (congress.gov 2) That split matters because crypto firms have spent years not knowing which cop was on which beat. Senator Cynthia Lummis and Senate Banking Committee chairman Tim Scott said in June 2025 that Congress needed a statutory line between a security and a commodity and a clear allocation of authority between the two agencies. (lummis.senate.gov) The bill also tries to answer a second question: when does a token stop looking like a startup fundraising deal and start looking like an operating network. A Congressional Research Service summary says the bill creates an exemption from Securities Act registration for some investment contracts tied to digital commodities, with a $75 million cap over 12 months and required offering statements. (congress.gov) To use that path, an issuer would have to argue that its blockchain is “mature,” which the bill defines as a system not controlled by one person or one common-control group. The bill also points to ownership concentration, user access, and whether the token’s value comes from the blockchain’s use and functioning. (congress.gov) That is why people in Washington keep talking about “clarity” instead of “approval.” The point is not that every token becomes legal overnight; the point is that banks, brokers, custodians, and exchanges would finally know which rulebook applies before they spend millions building products. (congress.gov) (lummis.senate.gov) The politics have shifted too. Reuters reported on April 8 that Bessent said federal rules are needed to keep crypto development and investment anchored in the United States, which is a much more pro-build message than the enforcement-first posture that defined much of the last cycle. (y94.com) (usnews.com) If the Senate moves, the winners are unlikely to be every token issuer at once. The early advantage would probably go to firms that already have compliance teams, custody systems, exchange licenses, and institutional clients, because a clear map helps the companies that are already closest to building on it. That is an inference from the bill’s registration-heavy design and the agencies’ planned rulemaking timeline, including a 270-day deadline for some Securities and Exchange Commission rules after enactment. (congress.gov 1) (congress.gov 2) So the fight in Washington is no longer just over whether crypto should exist inside the U.S. financial system. It is over who gets to own the toll roads once Congress finally draws the lanes. (congress.gov 1) (congress.gov 2)
