CLARITY Act splits Wall Street and crypto as Goldman Sachs breaks with banks and Charles Hoskinson backs Warren – Crypto News

The revised CLARITY Act is exposing unusual divisions across Wall Street, Washington and the crypto industry as lawmakers struggle to build support for a Senate vote.

Senate Republicans this week released a new draft that would bar the president and other federal officials from issuing or sponsoring digital assets.

The changes have drawn sharply different reactions from influential figures across finance and crypto.

Goldman Sachs Chief Executive David Solomon reportedly urged Congress to advance the sweeping market-structure bill despite disagreements within the banking industry over provisions that could intensify competition for deposits.

Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson, meanwhile, has sided with Sen. Elizabeth Warren on one of the bill’s most contentious political issues, arguing that President Donald Trump should stay out of crypto markets while in office.

The contrasting positions underline the complicated coalition surrounding CLARITY as senators seek compromises on stablecoin rewards, government ethics and financial regulation, with the bill’s path to passage narrowing.

Goldman Sachs breaks with banking opposition

In a recent interview, Solomon took a different position from major banking groups that want lawmakers to tighten the bill before it advances.

The banking executive told Politico he was “very supportive” of moving the legislation forward to establish a market structure and allow innovation to develop. While acknowledging that the bill remained imperfect, he said creating a level playing field and greater market stability should take priority.

That stance contrasts with a coalition of banking groups that said the latest Senate draft still threatens the deposits that support lending across the US.

The American Bankers Association, Bank Policy Institute, Consumer Bankers Association, Financial Services Forum, Independent Community Bankers of America and National Bankers Association said lawmakers should strengthen restrictions on interest-like payments for holding stablecoins.

The groups warned that allowing such rewards could draw deposits away from banks and reduce funding available for small-business, mortgage and agricultural lending.

“We appreciate [lawmakers] willingness to consider targeted changes that would strengthen the prohibition on interest-like payments for holding stablecoins,” the groups said, adding that the payments could “siphon away the bank deposits” used to finance lending.

The dispute has become one of the main fault lines between banks and crypto companies as stablecoins expand beyond trading into payments, settlement and other financial services.

Banks argue that exchanges and other intermediaries could effectively compete with deposit accounts by offering rewards on stablecoin balances while operating under a different regulatory framework. Crypto companies have pushed back, saying broader restrictions would curb competition and protect incumbent lenders.

JPMorgan Chase Chief Executive Jamie Dimon has also raised concerns about the framework, putting Solomon on the opposite side of an increasingly public debate within Wall Street over how far Congress should go in restricting stablecoin rewards.

The disagreement comes even as large financial institutions deepen their involvement in blockchain-based finance. Goldman and other banks have explored tokenized deposits, stablecoins and blockchain settlement as digital assets become more closely integrated with traditional markets.

Solomon’s support suggests Goldman Sachs is willing to tolerate unresolved disputes over those provisions to secure a broader federal framework for crypto markets.

Hoskinson backs Warren as crypto industry pushes for passage

The political divide is becoming more complicated inside crypto, where support for CLARITY is increasingly colliding with concerns over Trump’s personal involvement in the industry.

In an X post, Hoskinson blamed the Trump administration’s handling of crypto policy for making the legislation more partisan.

Hoskinson said Democrats had increasingly framed the issue as “Crypto = Trump = Corruption,” making it harder to build bipartisan support for legislation. He said:

“No progress can be made if crypto is partisan.”

He also backed Warren’s argument that Trump’s position creates a conflict with direct participation in financial markets. Over the past year, Warren has consistently criticized Trump’s crypto ventures, while arguing that the current bill will “supercharge Trump’s crypto corruption.”

In view of this, Hoskinson posited that “the president shouldn’t be a market participant” because “he is the ultimate insider” whose policies and actions influence the broader industry.

The comments put Hoskinson alongside one of crypto’s most persistent critics on a narrow but consequential issue while stopping well short of opposing broader market-structure legislation.

That distinction is important because much of the crypto industry continues to press Congress to pass CLARITY despite acknowledging shortcomings in the latest draft.

Chris Dixon, who leads crypto investing at Andreessen Horowitz, said the legislation would establish protections that are currently missing from US crypto markets and argued that lawmakers should not allow disagreements over individual provisions to derail the broader framework.