Clarity Act debate centers on crypto intermediaries as U.S. bill stalls

Traders Union
All News
Crypto
Clarity Act crypto debate

Highlights

The Clarity Act allocates only 2%–4% of its language to crypto technology and 44%–77% to regulating intermediaries like exchanges and brokers.
During the 2024 election cycle, crypto groups raised over $200 million, with Coinbase, a16z, and Ripple contributing more than 80% of political funding from about 40 entities.
Despite Republican control post-2024 election and Trump's backing, no crypto market structure bill passed Congress, missing July 4 and pre-August recess deadlines.

Legislative design and delayed timeline

As argued in CoinDesk by Berkeley Law lecturer Hermine Wong, the current U.S. debate has increasingly treated support for crypto and support for the Clarity Act as the same position, even as the bill remains stalled in Congress.

Wong writes that after years of failed crypto legislation, enforcement actions and industry collapses, nearly any comprehensive bill began to look like progress. She contends that the Clarity Act instead channels that demand for regulatory clarity into a framework centered on exchanges, brokers, custodians and other market intermediaries, rather than on the underlying technology.

Her review says only 2% to 4% of the bill’s language focuses on crypto technology, while 44% to 77% focuses on intermediaries. In that reading, the legislation does not primarily enable peer-to-peer financial infrastructure, but formalizes rules around the business models of crypto middlemen.

Political funding and broader industry implications

Wong links that legislative emphasis to political spending during the 2024 election cycle, when crypto groups raised more than $200 million. She says the funding did not come from a broad retail donor base, but from a concentrated group of about 40 crypto businesses and wealthy individuals, with Coinbase, a16z and Ripple providing more than 80% of the money raised.

She also argues Republicans, despite controlling both chambers of Congress and the White House after the 2024 election and having President Trump’s support, have still failed to pass a crypto market structure bill. The measure has already missed timelines previously promoted by supporters, including July 4 and the pre-August recess period.

In Wong’s view, the procedural vote may now serve both as a way to deflect responsibility for the delay and as a political scorecard for directing crypto super PAC spending against Democrats. She says Democrats could still pursue legislation that protects crypto technology more directly, warning that ordinary users risk being left behind if regulation continues to prioritize intermediaries.

Our earlier article covered the Clarity Act push in Washington, highlighting Senate Banking Committee leaders’ argument that a durable digital-assets framework is needed to keep innovators and investment in the U.S. We also noted expectations for a forced vote and a September timeline, alongside market sensitivity to Clarity Act headlines as a potential turning point for crypto market structure.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.