Is the US Government Paving the Way for Bitcoin & Crypto All-Time Highs? A Deep Dive into the CLARITY Act
The US crypto landscape is on the cusp of a potential transformation. On January 13th, the Senate Banking Committee released the full text of the highly anticipated Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (CLARITY) ahead of its expected markup. This 278-page draft represents a significant shift in regulatory approach, moving away from a token-by-token assessment towards a comprehensive “lane system” designed to clarify jurisdiction based on the functional lifecycle of a digital asset. The CLARITY Act’s potential passage is being closely watched by investors and industry leaders, with some predicting a new bull run if it becomes law. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the CLARITY Act, its implications for the crypto market, and the key debates surrounding its implementation.
A New Regulatory Framework: The “Lane System”
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott emphasized the bill’s core objective: “This legislation gives everyday Americans the protections and certainty they deserve. Investors and innovators can’t wait forever while Washington stands still, and bad actors exploit the system. This legislation puts Main Street first, cracks down on criminals and foreign adversaries, and keeps the future of finance here in the United States.” The CLARITY Act aims to achieve this by establishing clear regulatory boundaries between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), two agencies that have historically clashed over jurisdiction in the crypto space.
Bitwise’s Chief Investment Officer, Matt Hougan, described the legislation as a potential turning point, stating it could be the “Punxsutawney Phil of this crypto winter,” suggesting that passage could signal the start of a new bull market. Prediction markets reflect this optimism, with Polymarket users currently assigning an 80% probability to the CLARITY Act being signed into law this year. However, time is of the essence, as Senators have a limited 48-hour window to propose amendments.
Bridging the SEC and CFTC Divide
At the heart of the CLARITY Act lies a legislative effort to reconcile the roles of the SEC and CFTC. The bill seeks to define a clear distinction between securities and commodities within the digital asset ecosystem. Historically, the SEC has asserted jurisdiction over tokens sold as investments, while the CFTC has focused on digital assets traded as commodities. The CLARITY Act attempts to codify this distinction, recognizing that a token’s classification can evolve over time.
The concept of an “ancillary asset” is central to this framework. This category encompasses network tokens whose value is heavily reliant on the “entrepreneurial or managerial efforts” of the originator or related parties. The SEC is tasked with defining the application of these concepts through rulemaking, effectively granting the agency initial oversight of crypto projects. Once a token is deemed an ancillary asset, it falls under an SEC-led disclosure regime mirroring the standards applied to public equity offerings.
Disclosure Requirements: A “Public-Company-ish” Standard
The disclosure requirements outlined in the CLARITY Act are extensive and intentionally designed to align with those of publicly traded companies. Issuers would be required to provide:
- Reviewed or audited financial statements (depending on the size of the raise)
- Ownership details
- Records of related-party transactions
- Token distribution schedules
- Code audits
- Detailed tokenomics
- Market data, including average prices and high/lows
However, the bill also establishes a clear transition point. Once a token is no longer considered an ancillary asset, it’s defined as a “digital commodity,” anchoring its regulation to the Commodity Exchange Act. The SEC is required to notify the CFTC of certain certifications, solidifying the CFTC’s role in overseeing the trading venues and intermediaries handling these assets.
This division of labor ensures that the SEC focuses on the “promoter” questions – disclosure, anti-fraud measures, and fundraising – while the CFTC regulates the market infrastructure and trading activities. Furthermore, the bill extends investor protection rules to intermediaries, applying Regulation Best Interest to broker-dealer recommendations involving digital commodities and upholding the fiduciary duty of investment advisors.
Fast Pass for ETFs and Staking Clarity
For existing major digital assets, the CLARITY Act offers a significant benefit through a specific carve-out related to exchange-traded products (ETPs). A network token is automatically excluded from being classified as an ancillary asset if it’s the principal asset of an ETP listed on a registered national securities exchange as of January 1, 2026. This provision effectively provides a fast track to commodity status, bypassing years of legal debate surrounding decentralization.
This “ETF gatekeeping” clause directly benefits Bitcoin and Ethereum, given their established presence in the ETP market. It also extends this benefit to other assets like XRP, Solana, Litecoin, Hedera, Dogecoin, and Chainlink that achieve similar ETP listing status. This is a major win for the industry, providing regulatory certainty for widely adopted digital assets.
Beyond asset classification, the CLARITY Act addresses concerns surrounding staking. The bill defines staking rewards as “gratuitous distributions,” effectively removing the risk of them being classified as securities income. This includes self-staking, self-custodial staking with a third party, and even liquid staking structures. This is particularly significant given the SEC’s previous legal actions against firms like Kraken for their staking services.
The bill establishes a presumption that a gratuitous distribution does not, in itself, constitute an offer or sale of a security. The language specifically addresses “self-custodial with a third party,” clarifying that it applies when the third-party operator does not maintain custody or control of the staked tokens. This creates a safe harbor for non-custodial and liquid staking designs, while custodial exchange staking remains subject to regulatory scrutiny.
Stablecoin Yield and the Banking Sector
The CLARITY Act also tackles the debate surrounding stablecoin yields. Section 404 appears to favor the banking sector, prohibiting companies from paying interest or yield solely for holding a payment stablecoin. However, legal experts highlight a crucial distinction in how the bill structures the yield economy.
Bill Hughes, a lawyer at Consensys, notes that the CLARITY Act allows stablecoins to be used to earn yield, but it draws a clear line between “the stablecoin” and “the yield product.” The bill adopts the definition of a “payment stablecoin” from the GENIUS Act, requiring full backing, redeemability at par, and use for settlement, without any entitlement to interest or profits for holders. This prevents stablecoins like USDC from being classified as securities or shadow banking products simply by offering yield.
However, Title IV includes provisions for “preserving rewards for stablecoin holders.” This allows users to earn yield by utilizing stablecoins in other systems, such as DeFi lending protocols, on-chain money markets, or custodial interest accounts. This architecture ensures that the stablecoin remains a payment instrument, while the yield-generating product is regulated as a separate financial entity.
DeFi Safe Harbors and the “Control Test”
The CLARITY Act addresses the complex issue of decentralized finance (DeFi) interfaces. Instead of focusing on a simplistic “wallets vs. websites” debate, the bill establishes a “control test” to determine regulatory obligations. According to the text, a web interface is treated as mere software – and thus not subject to broker-dealer registration – if it does not hold user funds, control private keys, or have the authority to block or reorder transactions.
This creates a statutory safe harbor for non-custodial platforms like Uniswap, 1inch, and MetaMask’s swap UI, classifying them as software publishers rather than financial intermediaries. Conversely, any operator possessing control – such as the ability to move funds without user signatures, batch trades, or route orders through proprietary liquidity – is classified as a broker or exchange. This captures centralized entities like Coinbase and Binance, as well as custodial bridges and CeFi yield platforms.
Remaining Issues and the Path Forward
Despite the optimism, the release of the CLARITY Act has triggered a flurry of activity among legal experts to identify potential flaws before the amendment deadline. Jake Chervinsky, Chief Legal Officer at Variant Fund, highlighted “many” critical issues requiring attention. Concerns have also been raised regarding potential threats to privacy and decentralization.
Specific policy hurdles identified include ambiguities surrounding stablecoin yield and new definitions within the DeFi section that could potentially rope decentralized protocols into strict regulatory frameworks. The bill’s current chances of passage are described by some insiders as “NGMI” (not gonna make it), citing structural disagreements and conflicts between Senate Democrats and the White House.
As the Senate Banking Committee moves towards the markup, the political landscape remains fluid. The CLARITY Act represents a significant step towards providing regulatory clarity for the crypto industry. Whether it will ultimately signal an early spring for US crypto regulation remains to be seen, but the debate surrounding its passage is undoubtedly shaping the future of digital assets.
Disclaimer: Our writers' opinions are solely their own and do not reflect the opinion of CryptoSlate. None of the information you read on CryptoSlate should be taken as investment advice, nor does CryptoSlate endorse any project that may be mentioned or linked to in this article. Buying and trading cryptocurrencies should be considered a high-risk activity. Please do your own due diligence before taking any action related to content within this article. Finally, CryptoSlate takes no responsibility should you lose money trading cryptocurrencies.