Cryptocurrency

Crypto finally has a CLARITY Act date – Crypto News

Published

1 month ago

June 24, 2026

Dripp

The House Financial Services Committee has scheduled a July 17 field hearing in New York on the CLARITY Act, giving the bill another public stage while the Senate floor vote that would decide its immediate path remains unscheduled.

The CLARITY Act cleared the House in July 2025, with 78 Democrats joining the majority, establishing the baseline that Senate negotiators have worked from ever since.

Senate Agriculture advanced the Digital Commodity Intermediaries Act on Jan. 29, building on the House text and extending new CFTC authority over digital commodity spot markets.

Senate Banking worked through the SEC-facing portion in multiple drafts before a May 14 markup, where the CLARITY Act advanced 15-9.

All 13 Republicans were joined by Democrats Ruben Gallego and Angela Alsobrooks, both of whom immediately conditioned their committee votes on further negotiations before any Senate floor commitment.

What the past six weeks exposed

Between the May 14 markup and the July 17 hearing date, the political picture tightened considerably. Galaxy Research head Alex Thorn cut his 2026 passage estimate from 75% to 60% on June 5, citing the Senate calendar as the primary constraint.

His note identified two compounding factors: the FISA reauthorization fight consumed floor time the week of June 8, compounding a week already lost to the anti-weaponization fund debate, and no visible progress emerged on the ethics and illicit-finance provisions that Democratic crossover votes require.

JPMorgan issued a parallel warning about the narrowing legislative window, and Stifel’s Brian Gardner wrote that a realistic 2026 path requires the bill to clear the Senate by the end of July.

Senator Alsobrooks has stated publicly that she will withhold floor support until a provision covering government officials’ crypto holdings is added, a direct response to the President Donald Trump family’s extensive crypto activity, ranging from stablecoins to memecoins to mining operations.

Democrats also pressed for stronger AML language, and Senator Jack Reed filed roughly 20 amendments before the May 14 markup alone.

The Senate needs at least seven Democratic votes to clear a motion to invoke cloture. Gallego and Alsobrooks are the only Democrats on the committee publicly on record, and both flagged their support as contingent.

Five or more additional Democratic votes are the arithmetic still unresolved heading into the July 17 hearing.

CLARITY's path is moving, but the floor vote is still missing — A timeline tracks the CLARITY Act from House passage in July 2025 to a July 17, 2026 field hearing, with Senate floor vote and three further steps still unresolved.

The CLARITY Act stablecoin fight

The bill’s most consequential market-facing dispute centers on Section 404, which prohibits digital asset service providers from paying interest or yield solely for holding a payment stablecoin, while preserving activity-based rewards and incentives tied to transactions, payments, transfers, platform use, loyalty programs, liquidity, collateral, staking, governance, or other ecosystem participation. The provision leaves disclosure rules to joint rulemaking by the SEC and the CFTC.

Six banking trade groups, including the American Bankers Association and the Bank Policy Institute, called the language insufficient at the May 14 vote, warning that stablecoin offerings would draw deposits away from banks and undermine local lending.

Their position is that the passive yield prohibition needs tighter technical language to close perceived loopholes.

The crypto industry largely accepted the Tillis-Alsobrooks compromise text, while banks continued pressing for a stronger standard. That gap led to over 100 amendments being filed before the markup, and no public resolution has emerged since.

Regarding exchanges, stablecoin issuers, and competition between crypto platforms and traditional bank deposits, Section 404 is still open to legislative action.

Section 404 issue	Crypto industry position	Banking industry concern	Why it matters for markets
Passive stablecoin yield	Accepts ban on deposit-like interest if usage-based rewards remain allowed	Worries loopholes could recreate interest-like products	Affects Coinbase, Circle, USDC rewards, and exchange incentive models
Activity-based rewards	Wants flexibility for rewards tied to transactions, usage, or platform activity	Argues the distinction may be too easy to game	Determines whether crypto platforms can compete with bank deposits
Deposit competition	Frames stablecoins as payment and settlement infrastructure	Says yield-like rewards could pull deposits from community banks	Links crypto market structure to bank lending and credit availability
Regulatory rulemaking	Supports joint SEC, CFTC, and Treasury implementation	Wants tighter statutory language before agencies interpret it	Determines whether Section 404 is settled in law or fought later in rules
Political risk	Views compromise as necessary to keep CLARITY moving	Continues pressing senators for stronger language	Keeps the bill exposed to amendments before a floor vote

The housing connection

The Senate Banking Committee’s CLARITY draft initially included the Build Now Act as Section 904, a housing-supply incentive provision unrelated to digital assets, added as political packaging around the bill.