Digital asset industry representatives met with the U.S. Senate Banking Committee on March 23 for a closed-door review of a White House-backed compromise on stablecoin rewards, led by Senators Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks. The immediate goal was to restart the stalled CLARITY Act after months of legislative deadlock.
Stablecoin reward language moved to the center of the bill
The main dispute has focused on how the bill treats stablecoin yield. Banking lobby groups have opposed provisions that could let issuers offer high-yield stablecoin products, arguing that such products could pull deposits out of commercial banks and into digital dollar alternatives. Reports say the revised compromise draws a sharper regulatory line: yield that accrues on idle balances simply for holding a stablecoin would likely be banned, while rewards connected to payments, transfers, or active platform use would remain allowed.
Senator Cynthia Lummis has also said traditional banking terms such as “deposits” and “interest” would be removed from the legislative text. The intent is to avoid presenting digital assets as direct substitutes for savings accounts. It is a narrow wording change on paper, but an important one for the politics around the bill.
April markup remains the target, but the calendar is tight
The compromise clears one major obstacle, yet the legislative window is shrinking. The Senate Banking Committee is aiming for a formal markup in the second half of April, after the Easter recess. That schedule is still fragile. Senate floor time is already crowded by debate over the SAVE America Act and government funding, which could delay the markup or alter the recess timeline.
Senator Bernie Moreno has warned that if the CLARITY Act does not reach the Senate floor by May, it could be pushed aside as the 2026 midterm election cycle takes priority. That warning has added urgency for industry participants looking for a clearer federal framework.
Industry sees a competitiveness risk if uncertainty drags on
Michael Treacy, Commercial Director at Openpayd, said delay would not mean a reversal in progress, but it could push companies toward jurisdictions that offer more regulatory certainty. He argued that internal inertia is already a major barrier for enterprises trying to modernize financial infrastructure, and extended uncertainty gives risk and compliance teams another reason to pause.
Treacy pointed to Europe’s MiCA regime as evidence of an early-mover advantage. His view is that more delays would slow U.S. momentum rather than erase it, but that slowdown could still matter if other jurisdictions continue moving first on workable crypto rules.