Senate Passes One Big Beautiful Act in a Nail-Biter Vote
On July 2, the U.S. Senate passed the controversial 'One Big Beautiful Act' by a razor-thin margin of 51-50. The deciding vote was cast by Vice President Vance, breaking the tie. After a marathon session of amendments, the bill passed without any Bitcoin- or crypto-related provisions included.
Lummis' De Minimis Amendment: Pushed but Not Voted
Republican Senator Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming had been actively pushing for an amendment that would create a de minimis capital gains tax exemption for crypto transactions: transactions valued at $300 or less would be exempt, with an annual cap of $5,000. The senator urged crypto enthusiasts to call their senators to convey the importance of the amendment.
However, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-ID) did not schedule a vote on the amendment, effectively killing its chances. The amendment was not included in the final bill.
Industry Leaders Speak Out
Bitcoin and crypto industry leaders voiced strong support for the amendment. David Bailey, Chairman of BTC Inc., stated on X: "The de minimis transaction exemption is the #1 request from the grassroots bitcoin and crypto community and anyone who stands against it is directly screwing over the 50m Americans that own bitcoin and crypto." Tyler Winklevoss, co-founder of Gemini, added: "Passing the de minimis transaction exemption for bitcoin and crypto transactions <$300 is critical to making America the bitcoin and crypto capital of the world."
Next Steps: Lummis Will Continue the Fight
Senator Lummis acknowledged the disappointment but pledged to continue working with Chairman Crapo and other Finance Committee members to address crypto tax treatment. Her office shared a statement with Bitcoin Magazine: "Senator Lummis had productive conversations with Chairman Crapo and other Senate Finance Committee members over the last few weeks, and looks forward to continuing her work with the Chairman and the rest of the committee to fix these important tax issues at a later date." No timeline for the 'later date' was provided.