The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act — the first comprehensive U.S. crypto market structure bill to reach the Senate floor — sits on General Orders Calendar No. 423 as of June 1, 2026. The legislation cleared the Senate Banking Committee 15-9 on May 14, with two Democrats crossing party lines. It...
"Sixty percent odds still describe a bill that is more likely than not to become law in 2026." — Alex Thorn, Head of Research, Galaxy Digital
The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act — the first comprehensive U.S. crypto market structure bill to reach the Senate floor — sits on General Orders Calendar No. 423 as of June 1, 2026. The legislation cleared the Senate Banking Committee 15-9 on May 14, with two Democrats crossing party lines. It now requires 60 Senate votes to pass, meaning at least seven additional Democratic crossovers beyond the two already secured.
Four unresolved disputes threaten the bill's survival before the August recess: a rejected ethics amendment that cost Democratic support, a law enforcement fight over developer protections, a banking industry campaign against stablecoin yield provisions, and a CFTC that lacks the commissioners and staff to execute the mandate the bill would hand it. Galaxy Digital has cut its passage probability from 75% to 60%. Polymarket contracts have traded as low as 47%. JPMorgan analysts assess the odds below 50%.
The clock is the binding constraint. Four working weeks remain in June, three in July. Senate leadership has not scheduled floor time.
The CLARITY Act originated as H.R.3633, introduced by House Financial Services Committee Chairman French Hill on May 29, 2025. The House passed it in July 2025 with bipartisan support. The Senate Banking Committee released a 309-page companion text on May 12, 2026, and voted to advance it two days later.
On June 1, a revised Senate version was published and placed on the Legislative Calendar. No floor vote date has been set. According to CoinDesk, the bill may require up to a week of floor time — a significant allocation given competing legislative priorities.
The practical deadline is the July 4 recess. After that, Congress faces midterm election dynamics that historically freeze major legislation. Galaxy Digital's research team estimated on May 22 that the bill had a 75% chance of passage by year-end; by June 6, they lowered that figure to 60%, citing the shrinking calendar and unresolved policy disputes.
The CLARITY Act would split crypto oversight between two federal regulators:
CFTC jurisdiction: Exclusive authority over "digital commodity" spot markets, including registration categories for exchanges, brokers, and dealers. Requirements include customer asset segregation, qualified custody, disclosure obligations, and market surveillance.
SEC jurisdiction: Retained authority over "investment contract assets" — tokens sold through offerings that meet the Howey test criteria.
Stablecoins: A third category with joint SEC-CFTC oversight.
The bill also incorporates the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA) as Section 604, codifying FinCEN's 2019 guidance that non-custodial software developers who do not control user funds are not money transmitters subject to Bank Secrecy Act registration.
The SEC and CFTC would have up to 18 months to complete rulemakings, placing full implementation in late 2027 or 2028.
On May 14, the Senate Banking Committee voted 13-11 along party lines to reject an amendment by Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) that would have barred the president, vice president, and members of Congress from owning or participating in cryptocurrency businesses. Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH) led opposition, calling the amendment procedurally out of order.
The rejection has become a blocking issue. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Van Hollen have stated they will not supply Democratic votes needed for the 60-vote threshold unless ethics language is added — most likely via a floor amendment. Without those votes, the bill cannot pass.
Section 604's developer safe harbor has drawn opposition from federal law enforcement. On June 11, the White House Crypto Council hosted approximately 20 officials at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, including representatives from the Fraternal Order of Police, the National District Attorneys Association, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, and FinCEN. House Majority Whip Tom Emmer and White House crypto advisor David Sacks made opening remarks.
The concern: law enforcement groups argue that shielding non-custodial developers from money-transmission liability could create legal cover for illicit finance infrastructure. The crypto industry counters that Section 604 merely codifies existing regulatory guidance and is essential for open-source development.
On June 9, more than 60 crypto CEOs and founders — including executives from Coinbase, a16z, Uniswap, Solana Labs, and Kraken — sent a letter to Senate leadership urging passage with Section 604 intact. CoinDesk reported that a separate provision revision could still leave non-controlling developers exposed to treatment as securities intermediaries, undermining the safe harbor's intended scope.
The bill's stablecoin section prohibits interest or yield on idle stablecoin balances while permitting "activity-based rewards" — a compromise that has satisfied neither side.
The American Bankers Association (ABA) has framed yield-bearing stablecoins as an existential threat to the deposit base. ABA research estimates that if stablecoins offer yield, the market could grow from $300 billion to $2 trillion, reducing bank lending capacity by 20% or more. ABA members have sent more than 8,000 letters to Senate offices opposing the yield compromise. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon has publicly argued that crypto firms offering bank-like services should face comparable regulatory requirements.
The crypto industry views the yield restriction as anticompetitive, arguing that activity-based rewards are a narrow workaround that limits stablecoin utility as a savings vehicle.
The Senate Agriculture Committee passed a parallel version of the market structure bill on a party-line vote, diverging from the Banking Committee text on several points. Reconciling the two versions — particularly on CFTC resource provisions — adds another procedural layer before a floor vote can occur. Agriculture Committee Democrats have tied their support to White House nominations for CFTC commissioner vacancies.
The CLARITY Act would hand the CFTC primary oversight of the retail-facing digital commodity spot market — a mandate the agency is not currently equipped to execute.
Commissioner vacancies: Chairman Michael Selig has been the agency's sole commissioner since December 2025. Four of five seats are empty. On May 15, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn Thompson (R-PA) and Ranking Member Angie Craig (D-MN) sent a bipartisan letter urging President Trump to fill the vacancies.
Budget disparity: The CFTC operates on approximately $365 million for FY2026. The SEC's budget is approximately $2.1 billion — nearly six times larger.
Staffing cuts: Since the beginning of the second Trump administration, the CFTC's workforce has been reduced by approximately 20%, to around 600 employees. Critics, including former CFTC officials, have warned that assigning sweeping new crypto responsibilities to an agency with a shrinking workforce amounts to "regulation without enforcement."
The House bill text includes funding and hiring mechanisms, and the Senate Agriculture Committee has tied market-structure authority to resource commitments. Whether those provisions survive reconciliation is unresolved.
The crypto industry has mounted its largest-ever legislative push. On June 7, Stand With Crypto, the Blockchain Association, the Crypto Council for Innovation, and The Digital Chamber organized a letter signed by more than 200 companies and organizations — including Coinbase, Circle, Ripple, Kraken, a16z, Binance.US, Multicoin Capital, Riot Platforms, and Uniswap Labs — urging Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to schedule a floor vote.
Prediction markets have priced the outcome with notable skepticism. Polymarket contracts on CLARITY Act passage fell to 47% in early June amid the White House ethics standoff. Galaxy Digital placed a $10 million position on Kalshi betting on passage, signaling institutional conviction even as its own research team lowered the probability estimate. JPMorgan analysts assess the odds below 50%.
The divergence between industry lobbying intensity and market-implied passage probability suggests that informed capital views the legislative obstacles as substantial despite the political will.
The CLARITY Act represents the closest the United States has come to comprehensive crypto market structure legislation. Its passage would resolve a decade-long jurisdictional ambiguity between the SEC and CFTC, establish registration frameworks for digital commodity exchanges, and codify developer safe harbors.
The bill's substantive provisions are largely bipartisan. The obstacles are procedural and political: an ethics dispute that splits the Democratic caucus, a law enforcement concern that the White House is actively mediating, a banking lobby defending its deposit franchise, and a regulatory agency that may lack the capacity to execute the mandate.
Whether the bill passes in 2026 depends less on crypto policy preferences and more on whether Senate leadership allocates floor time during a compressed pre-recess calendar. The bill's sponsors are running out of weeks, not votes.