The Senate Banking Committee's markup of the CLARITY Act on May 14 marked a pivotal moment for US crypto regulation, with Senator Tim Scott expected to oppose more than a dozen amendments over drafting concerns while the committee tested a hard-fought stablecoin yield compromise. The session, which began at 10:30 AM ET in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, is the most significant procedural step yet for the first comprehensive crypto market-structure bill.
Amendment dispute centers on drafting, not policy. Chairman Scott’s opposition targets the language of over twelve proposed amendments, not their underlying goals. The concern is that poorly drafted amendments could introduce ambiguity, expand the bill's scope unintentionally, or create unforeseen regulatory consequences. This technical objection could slow the markup, but it does not signal opposition to the bill itself—Scott has been a driving force behind the legislation. Moreover, drafting-based disputes mean amendments may be revised and resubmitted rather than killed outright, potentially leading to a cleaner final text.
The Tillis-Alsobrooks stablecoin-yield compromise. The markup’s centerpiece is the stablecoin-yield deal crafted by Senators Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks. Earlier drafts left interest payments on stablecoin holdings ambiguous; the compromise bans yield on passive balances (anything resembling a bank deposit) but permits activity-based rewards tied to payments and transfers—shifting from a “buy and hold” model to a “buy and use” model. Industry participants like Circle and Coinbase must now restructure any holding-based reward programs to transactional incentives. This framework also shapes how tokenized money-market funds can be marketed to retail investors.
Banking lobby formally rejects the deal. The three largest US banking trade groups—the Independent Community Bankers of America, the Bank Policy Institute, and the American Bankers Association—opposed the compromise, arguing that even activity-based stablecoin rewards could pull low-cost deposits out of the regulated banking system. Crypto proponents counter that the ban on passive yield already concedes the core banking concern and that activity rewards are mere marketing incentives. Over 100 other amendments were also submitted, but the yield language remains the highest-stakes provision.
Digital-commodity classification and regulatory certainty. The bill would codify into federal law the digital-commodity classification that the SEC and CFTC jointly granted to assets like XRP earlier this year. If the markup advances with this language intact, exchanges gain a defensible legal basis for listing previously ambiguous assets, materially reducing legal risk. This is particularly important for institutional players, as JPMorgan has projected that Strategy’s Bitcoin purchases could hit $30 billion in 2026, and DeFi Development Corp reported SOL per share up 108% year-over-year—decisions that hinge partly on regulatory clarity.
Timeline and next steps. A clean markup could send the bill to the full Senate for debate and a June floor vote, with the White House targeting July 4 for final signing. However, banking lobby pressure and amendments disputes could push the timeline into Q3. Regardless, the structural shape—digital-commodity classification, activity-based stablecoin rewards, and a federal market-structure framework—is now the base case. The markup is the clearest signal yet that the US is moving toward comprehensive crypto regulation, with the final text being negotiated line by line.
