Senate advances CLARITY Act 15-9

The Senate Banking Committee voted 15-9 on May 14 to advance the CLARITY Act, a bill that would set a federal framework for digital-asset markets and send H.R. 3633 to the Senate floor. Chairman Tim Scott, a South Carolina Republican, said the committee had moved a “comprehensive market structure bill” after months of bipartisan negotiations. The measure would divide oversight between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, while adding anti-money-laundering and banking provisions to the broader framework. Two Democrats, Sens. Ruben Gallego of Arizona and Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland, joined all Republicans on the panel in backing the bill, according to committee accounts and CNBC’s report from the markup. Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts opposed the measure and said in opening remarks that lawmakers should not advance “a pro-industry crypto bill” that, in her words, would put consumers, investors and the financial system at risk. (banking.senate.gov) ### Which bill did the committee actually move? H.R. 3633 is the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025, a House-passed measure that was received in the Senate on September 18, 2025 and referred to the Banking Committee. Congress.gov’s text says the bill would create a system for regulating the offer and sale of digital commodities through the SEC and CFTC and includes additional provisions on bank custody, anti-fraud authority, recordkeeping and anti-CBDC language. (bankingjournal.aba.com) The Senate Banking Committee scheduled the markup as an executive session for 10:30 a.m. on May 14 in the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Chairman Scott’s office said the committee advanced the bill after “nearly a year of good-faith bipartisan negotiations.” ### How would the bill split power between the SEC and CFTC? The bill text gives the CFTC a central role over digital commodity transactions, while preserving SEC authority over certain primary-market transactions and disclosure requirements, according to the Congressional Research Service and the bill text. (congress.gov) The section-by-section summary released by the Banking Committee says the measure would treat certain “ancillary assets” as commodities while requiring initial and semiannual disclosures in specified transactions. (banking.senate.gov) Section 103 would create an exemption from SEC registration called “Regulation Crypto,” according to the committee’s summary. That provision would let companies raise the greater of $50 million a year for four years or 10% of the total dollar value of outstanding ancillary assets, with a $200 million cap on gross proceeds under the exemption. ### Who backed the bill, and who said it still needs changes? (congress.gov) Tim Scott said after the vote that the committee had shown “Washington can still work together” and that the legislation would bring digital assets “into the sunlight with clear rules.” Scott framed the bill as a way to support innovation and protect consumers. (banking.senate.gov) Angela Alsobrooks said her May 14 vote was “a vote to keep working in good faith” and did not mean she would vote for final passage on the Senate floor. Alsobrooks said the bill still needed changes on financial-crime enforcement and ethics rules that would apply broadly, including to the president and vice president. (banking.senate.gov) CNBC reported that Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, another Democrat involved in negotiations, said lawmakers planned to keep working through disagreements over how to catch bad actors using digital assets and how to address elected officials profiting from crypto. ### What are Warren and other critics objecting to? Elizabeth Warren said in her opening remarks that the committee’s job was not to advance a bill that would “grease the skids” for what she called President Donald Trump’s “crypto grift.” Her office also tied its objections to consumer protection, national security and financial-stability concerns. (alsobrooks.senate.gov) (cnbc.com) CNBC reported that banks, unions and law-enforcement agencies opposed the measure, arguing that some provisions would hurt consumers and endanger the financial system. That characterization came from opponents cited in the report, not from the committee’s official summary. ### What happens next in Congress? The committee’s May 14 release said the bill now moves to the Senate floor. (banking.senate.gov) Because H.R. 3633 is a House measure already received in the Senate, the next formal step is floor consideration in the Senate, where lawmakers can still seek changes before any final vote. (cnbc.com) Angela Alsobrooks said on May 14 that “we still have work to do,” and Scott’s office said the measure had advanced out of committee after bipartisan negotiations. The Senate calendar and floor process will determine when H.R. 3633 gets its next vote. (alsobrooks.senate.gov) (banking.senate.gov)