The CLARITY Act remains one of the main topics for the digital asset market in the US. The bill has not yet been passed or rejected: it remains under consideration in Congress, and the market is watching to see if lawmakers will return to it before the end of the year. If the document is postponed again, the industry, according to Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan, will still continue to grow.
For crypto companies, this document could become an important point of support in the American market. It would expand clear rules for working with digital assets, and the greatest benefit would go to exchanges, custodial services, DeFi projects, and products with stablecoins — everyone who needs to understand in advance which regulator to work with and what requirements to meet.
Bitwise calls itself one of the largest and fastest-growing crypto asset management companies. It offers investors various tools, including spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) for Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, and Solana.
What Is the CLARITY Act and Why Is It Needed
The CLARITY Act is a US bill on rules for digital assets. Its main goal is to remove legal uncertainty: companies should better understand which tokens are considered securities, which are digital commodities, who regulates them, and what rules exchanges, wallets, and DeFi services operate under.
In practical terms, the document should give crypto companies and trading platforms a more predictable operating regime: clear registration, disclosure requirements, client protection rules, and boundaries of responsibility to regulators.
- The SEC retains its focus on digital assets that are sold or used as securities.
- The CFTC receives a clearer role in overseeing digital commodities and the markets where they are traded.
- Exchanges, wallets, DeFi services, and products with stablecoins receive clearer rules for admitting and servicing clients.
Why the Passage of the CLARITY Act Is in Question
There are three working days left before the US Congress recess. Lawmakers will not return to work until September 14, which significantly reduces the chances of the document being passed before the end of the year. Matt Hougan suggests that consideration of the CLARITY Act may shift to the fall or winter of 2026.
Expectations have also changed sharply in the Polymarket prediction market. The probability of the law being passed by the end of the year has dropped to 13%. In February, traders estimated it above 80%, and as recently as May, the figure remained above 70%.
On Polymarket, there is a separate prediction dedicated to whether the CLARITY Act will be passed by the end of 2026. The dynamics of this forecast show how quickly market participants are revising their expectations for American crypto regulation.
Betting on the SEC and Rules Without Congress
Hougan believes that even without the rapid passage of the law, the industry still has a strong alternative. This refers to the rules that can be established by the US Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. Agency head Paul Atkins has already said that the regulator is ready and able to address many of the issues that the postponed bill was supposed to resolve.
The main debate around the CLARITY Act is where the SEC’s authority ends and the CFTC’s area of responsibility begins. If a digital asset resembles a security and is associated with raising money from investors, the SEC handles it. If the asset is closer to a digital commodity and is traded on the market as an independent instrument, the CFTC should play a larger role.
For cryptocurrency exchanges, market makers, wallets, and DeFi services, this is not theoretical, but a set of daily questions:
- regulation;
- consumer protection;
- fraud prevention;
- payments;
- risks.
Essentially, the CLARITY Act was supposed to address several painful topics for the blockchain and fintech sector: how to classify tokens, what disclosures are needed for investors, who oversees trading platforms, how to protect clients from fraud, and where the line is drawn between innovation, decentralization, and traditional financial market rules.
Hougan suggests that in the short term, Paul Atkins’s rules may even turn out to be softer and more convenient for cryptocurrencies and innovation than the CLARITY Act itself. For institutional capital, the predictability of rules is as important as their flexibility: large players are more willing to enter where it is clear who regulates assets, how exchanges operate, and what risks clients bear. But there is an important risk: if the new administration appoints a less crypto-friendly SEC chair, these decisions could be reconsidered.
“In a world where CLARITY does not work, and the SEC instead sets the rules, cryptocurrencies will have at least two and a half years — until the new administration appoints a new SEC chair — to continue developing. In this case, no SEC chair will be able to put the genie back in the bottle,” wrote Matt Hougan.
He notes that the industry has already changed significantly, and the arrival of institutional capital makes clear rules especially important.
- BlackRock, Nasdaq, JPMorgan, Visa, Mastercard, and Robinhood are major financial players who have already entered the digital asset market.
- The European Union, Japan, and Russia are jurisdictions rushing to adopt rules that support the development of cryptocurrencies.
Who Is Debating the Law and Why It Matters for the Market
The CLARITY Act is being promoted by US President Donald Trump. However, the document has met with strong resistance from traditional financial players. Their concern is understandable: clients may withdraw money from bank deposits and transfer it to crypto services, especially products with stablecoins and yields.
The most contentious points boil down to several topics:
- Banks fear an outflow of deposits to crypto services and products with stablecoins;
- Market participants argue about how much authority the SEC and CFTC should receive;
- Trump’s opponents point to the risk of a conflict of interest due to crypto projects associated with his family.
The political route of such initiatives usually passes through several venues:
- United States House of Representatives;
- United States Senate;
- United States Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry;
- United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Therefore, for the market, not only the final version of the law is important, but also how quickly lawmakers in the United States are ready to agree on it.
The debate around the law is also intensified by the political factor. Donald Trump is supported by the Republican Party (United States), and criticism of his crypto projects is actively voiced by representatives of the Democratic Party (United States). For the market, this means that the fate of the document depends not only on legal wording but also on political confrontation.
Additional pressure is associated with the alleged conflict of interest of Donald Trump. The US president and his family have launched several crypto projects and profited from them. At the end of July, Trump agreed to add amendments to the CLARITY Act that limit politicians’ use of cryptocurrencies, but the opposition was not fully satisfied.
Democratic senators Elizabeth Warren and Richard Blumenthal called on the SEC to investigate Donald Trump’s meme coin Official Trump (TRUMP). According to their assessment, nearly 1 million investors lost $3.81 billion on the token, while the US president earned $636 million. The senators speak of signs of rug pull and pump and dump schemes.
Donald Trump’s 2025 financial report revealed that his total income from crypto projects amounted to about $1.4 billion. Almost the entire amount is related to two projects — the TRUMP meme coin and the company World Liberty Financial. Both projects were launched with the participation of Trump’s family or companies associated with them.
The main takeaway for investors remains the same: even if the CLARITY Act does not pass quickly, the crypto market does not stop. But the date, whether it is 2025-01-01T00:00:00. :00 in regulatory trackers or a new Congress deadline, does not in itself determine the fate of the sector. Much more important is what rules the SEC will offer the market and whether they can last long enough for the industry to consolidate a new stage of growth.
{
“@context”: “https://schema.org”,
“@type”: “Article”,
“about”: [
{
“@type”: “Thing”,
“name”: “CLARITY Act”
},
{
“@type”: “Thing”,
“name”: “Cryptocurrency”
},
{
“@type”: “Organization”,
“name”: “United States Securities and Exchange Commission”
},
{
“@type”: “Organization”,
“name”: “United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission”
},
{
“@type”: “Place”,
“name”: “United States”
},
{
“@type”: “Thing”,
“name”: “Digital Asset”
},
{
“@type”: “Thing”,
“name”: “Decentralized Finance”
},
{
“@type”: “Thing”,
“name”: “Stablecoin”
},
{
“@type”: “Thing”,
“name”: “Regulation”
},
{
“@type”: “Thing”,
“name”: “Cryptocurrency Exchange”
}
]
}
