The Senate Banking Committee has scheduled a markup of the CLARITY Act for May 14, 2026, moving the bill one step closer to establishing a federal framework for digital-asset markets. The legislation aims to sort out token classification, agency oversight, and how intermediaries are regulated — a long-sought goal for the industry. But a last-minute compromise on stablecoin incentives is already drawing sharp opposition from both banking groups and some crypto executives.
The stablecoin compromise
Senators Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks negotiated a deal that restricts yield-like payments on passive stablecoin reserve holdings while allowing rewards tied to active use — spending or transacting, for instance. The idea was to placate regulators worried about stablecoins functioning like unregistered savings accounts, but the carve-out for active rewards left room for crypto firms to offer products that look a lot like interest.
Banking groups, led by the American Bankers Association, oppose the compromise. They argue it could let crypto companies pull deposits away from insured institutions by offering what's effectively an interest-bearing account under a different name. The banks want a tighter ban.
Crypto executives push back
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong had already withdrawn support for the bill in January, citing concerns about stablecoin yield restrictions. Now Paul Grewal of Coinbase and Stuart Alderoty of Ripple are pushing back against the banking lobby's latest objections. They say the compromise already draws a clear line between passive yield and active rewards — and that the banks are just trying to block competition.
“The distinction is real,” Grewal said in a statement. “Rewards for using the stablecoin to buy coffee aren't the same as interest paid on idle reserves.” Alderoty called the banking lobby's position “protectionism dressed up as consumer safety.”
What the markup means
This markup is a significant procedural step. The bill still has to be reconciled with whatever the Senate Agriculture Committee produces before it can reach the floor. Kristin Smith of the Solana Institute called the markup a “foundational moment” for U.S. digital-asset policy — though she acknowledged the fight over stablecoins isn't over.
The timing isn't great. A bitter lobbying war between banks and crypto firms could slow momentum, and Armstrong's early withdrawal signals that not everyone in the industry is on board. Still, getting a markup date means the committee is treating the CLARITY Act as a live piece of business.
What happens next
The banking committee will convene on May 14 to vote on amendments and advance the bill. If it passes, the real work begins: reconciling with the Agriculture Committee's parallel effort. The question hanging over the room is whether the stablecoin compromise can hold together long enough to keep both sides at the table — or whether it'll unravel before the bill ever reaches the full Senate.
