The U.S. Senate is unlikely to vote on the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act before September after Majority Leader John Thune placed Russia sanctions legislation and personnel nominations ahead of the long-delayed crypto market-structure bill.
The delay leaves the CLARITY Act without a clear path to enactment in 2026, despite its bipartisan 294-134 passage in the House on July 17, 2025, and a 15-9 Senate Banking Committee vote on May 14 to place the measure on the legislative calendar. The bill has yet to receive a full Senate vote or reach President Donald Trump’s desk.
Senate negotiators had treated Aug. 7 as the last practical date to move the legislation before the chamber’s schedule, the election calendar and unresolved policy disputes made a fall vote substantially harder. Thune’s July 27 scheduling comments pushed that deadline out of reach unless Senate leaders alter the agenda.
A prediction-market contract on whether the bill will become law in 2026 reflected the worsening outlook, with implied odds falling to 35% from 82% in February. The contract had accumulated $2.845 million in trading volume and traded above 70% several times from February through May before weakening through June and July.
Ethics language has become the senate’s main obstacle
The CLARITY Act would establish a statutory framework for determining whether a digital token falls under securities or commodities law. It would divide responsibilities between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, while setting rules covering private-key self-custody, offshore platform registration and certain stablecoin yield arrangements.
Its core framework has attracted support from firms seeking a clearer route to operate in the United States. The more immediate Senate obstacle has been an ethics provision aimed at crypto-related conflicts involving senior government officials and their families.
Democratic lawmakers have pointed to disclosures of more than $1 billion in crypto-related investments connected to Trump and his family while arguing that a credible ethics restriction must accompany the regulatory package. Senator Angela Alsobrooks, a Democrat from Maryland, previously described a White House compromise proposal as “not a serious offer.”
The vote math also gives the ethics dispute outsized leverage. With 53 Republicans in the Senate, supporters need between seven and nine Democratic votes to meet the 60-vote threshold generally required to advance major legislation. Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Rand Paul of Kentucky are expected to oppose the measure on policy grounds, increasing the need for cross-party support. Senator Ruben Gallego, a Democrat from Arizona, has been viewed as a more reliable possible supporter.
Stablecoin rules have already affected public crypto stocks
Market reaction to the bill has shown that individual provisions may matter more to listed companies than the overall label of “regulatory clarity.”
A March draft included language barring stablecoin arrangements “substantially equivalent to interest.” Circle Internet Group shares fell 20% in one session after that proposal emerged, while Coinbase shares dropped nearly 10%. The provision raised concerns that stablecoin issuers and distributors could face limits on the ways they share reserve income with customers or commercial partners.
That issue remains particularly relevant to Circle and Coinbase because of their USDC commercial arrangement. The companies are due to renegotiate that agreement in August 2026. A yield restriction enacted in some form could reduce high-margin distribution income generated through USDC, though the final legislative language remains unsettled.
USDC’s market capitalization exceeded $73 billion in July, according to Circle’s public supply data, putting the commercial stakes well beyond a narrow policy debate. Circle also faces growing competition from alternative stablecoin projects. The Open USD initiative has backing from more than 140 institutions, including Visa, Mastercard, Stripe and BlackRock, according to its public materials.
Coinbase shares closed at $165 on July 28, down 3.8% over five trading days. Raymond James set a $158 price target, while Oppenheimer lowered its target to $209. Baird cut its target to $142 from $160 and retained a neutral rating. Several analyst forecasts have linked a failure of CLARITY to a possible $140-to-$160 trading range, although Coinbase’s July 30 second-quarter earnings report may prove more immediately influential. Wall Street consensus called for earnings of $0.19 per share, following a first-quarter loss of $1.49 per share.
Bitcoin has tracked macro conditions more closely
Bitcoin traded around $65,000 to $66,000 in late July after a period of pressure that market commentary largely tied to liquidity conditions and macroeconomic risk appetite rather than Senate scheduling alone.
The distinction matters for traders trying to separate political headlines from broader market forces. A postponed vote removes one potential catalyst for regulated U.S. crypto businesses, but it does not directly change Bitcoin’s issuance schedule, network activity or the monetary conditions shaping risk assets.
Technical commentary has identified support near $61,700 and a deeper reference point near February’s $49,000 low if sentiment deteriorates. Bitcoin options open interest reached a record $65 billion across the market earlier this year, according to derivatives-market figures cited in the supplied material, exceeding futures open interest and indicating a large demand for hedging as well as directional exposure.
Crypto treasury companies have remained especially sensitive to Bitcoin’s price. Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, is frequently treated by equity traders as a leveraged proxy for the asset because of its large Bitcoin holdings and debt-financed acquisition model. After Bitcoin fell below $59,000 on July 1, Strategy shares traded around $85 to $86, down about 84% from a peak near $540 in November 2024.
Citigroup’s analysis tied a $100,000 Bitcoin baseline case partly to progress on CLARITY, estimating that Strategy’s holdings would be worth about $84 billion under that scenario. Strategy has disclosed a modeled downside threshold of negative 11.34% for annualized Bitcoin returns, below which it may need to consider debt restructuring.
Two public companies also sold a combined 511 Bitcoin within 24 hours to repay roughly $31.7 million in debt, illustrating the balance-sheet pressure that can emerge when Bitcoin declines sharply. Strategy’s second-quarter report, expected during the week of July 30 to 31, could add to volatility in the sector.
Existing rules would remain in place without a 2026 deal
Missing the Senate’s pre-recess window would not leave U.S. crypto markets without regulation. The GENIUS Act, effective since July 2025, already governs payment stablecoins and their issuers. The SEC and CFTC are also pursuing parallel rulemaking, including the SEC’s expected “Regulation Crypto” proposal, which is anticipated to enter formal rulemaking during the second half of 2026.
Those channels offer narrower and slower routes than a comprehensive market-structure statute. They would leave unresolved questions over token classification, agency boundaries and the treatment of trading platforms until regulators or courts establish more detailed standards.
The November midterm election further compresses the remaining legislative calendar. A year-end effort to attach portions of CLARITY to an omnibus spending measure has been discussed in market circles, but no senator has publicly confirmed such a plan. Without an unexpected agreement on ethics language, the bill’s next serious opening may come in 2027, after an election that could reshape the coalition needed to pass it.
Worried how stalled U.S. regulation shapes crypto prices? See how BTC, XRP and AVAX react under the CLARITY Act.
Disclaimer: The content on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not represent the views or financial advice of Toobit. We make no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from its use. Investing in digital assets involves risk; users should independently evaluate their financial situation and the risks involved. For further details, please consult our Terms of Service and Risk Disclosure.
