Senate CLARITY Act Advances Following Breakthrough on Stablecoin Yield Compromise

Key Takeaways

• Compromise language for the CLARITY Act has been unveiled, prohibiting stablecoin providers from offering yield based purely on token ownership
• Platforms retain the ability to distribute rewards connected to genuine user engagement and network participation
• The agreement emerged from extended negotiations led by Senators Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks
• Coinbase praised the compromise, with CEO Brian Armstrong endorsing immediate committee action
• Prediction markets now estimate a 55% probability of enactment in 2026, climbing 9 percentage points within a day

---

A protracted standoff between traditional financial institutions and cryptocurrency companies regarding stablecoin interest payments has reached resolution, eliminating a significant obstacle to the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act’s advancement.

Senators Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks unveiled updated legislative language Friday. The provisions explicitly prohibit digital asset companies from distributing interest or yield to users based solely on stablecoin possession.

Traditional banks raised concerns that yield-generating stablecoin products would function similarly to deposit accounts, diverting capital from conventional financial institutions and constraining their lending capabilities.

The compromise framework prevents crypto platforms from offering returns that are “economically or functionally equivalent” to deposit interest at banking institutions.

Nevertheless, the agreement permits incentives linked to what legislators describe as “bona fide activities.” Users can receive compensation for genuine engagement with cryptocurrency platforms and blockchain networks, rather than mere passive ownership.

[[LINK_START_0]]Coinbase[[LINK_END_0]] played a central role throughout negotiations and faced the highest stakes. Chief Policy Officer Faryar Shirzad acknowledged that banking interests secured stronger limitations than crypto advocates preferred, though the fundamental capability to provide activity-linked incentives remained intact.

CEO Brian Armstrong shared a concise message on X: “Mark it up.” Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal emphasized that the framework “preserves activity-based rewards tied to real participation on crypto platforms and networks.”

Operational Implications for Cryptocurrency Companies

An industry insider indicated that organizations will need to transition from a passive “buy and hold” strategy to an active “buy and use” approach to meet the requirements for permissible rewards under the revised framework.

The legislative text mandates that the Treasury Department and Commodity Futures Trading Commission initiate a formal rulemaking procedure within twelve months following enactment. This process will establish clearer parameters defining which activities qualify for reward programs.

Regulatory agencies will have authority to evaluate factors including account balance, holding period, and activity characteristics when developing these standards. The text incorporates anti-circumvention provisions to prevent regulatory arbitrage.

Congressional Calendar and Upcoming Actions

Galaxy Digital research director Alex Thorn suggested the text release indicates the Senate Banking Committee may schedule markup proceedings “as soon as the week of May 11.”

Thorn also cautioned that banking sector resistance is anticipated to intensify now that final language has been published.

Senator Bernie Moreno recently projected the legislation would reach completion by May’s conclusion. Senator Cynthia Lummis stated on April 11, “It’s now or never.”

The CLARITY Act encountered delays earlier this year when scheduled markup proceedings were abruptly canceled in January.

Polymarket participants currently assign a 55% probability to the CLARITY Act receiving presidential signature and becoming law in 2026.

President Donald Trump has prioritized cryptocurrency regulatory reform during his second administration. Digital asset firms have historically functioned within ambiguous regulatory boundaries, which industry leaders contend has constrained business development and innovation.