‘Too many issues’- Coinbase CEO withdraws support for CLARITY Act

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-01-15Last updated on 2026-01-15

Abstract

Coinbase has withdrawn its support for the CLARITY Act, a crypto market structure bill, leading the Senate Banking Committee to postpone its markup. CEO Brian Armstrong stated the current version has "too many issues" and is "bad for the sector," preferring no bill over a bad one. Key objections include bans on tokenized equities, stablecoin rewards, and privacy-limiting DeFi restrictions. In response, Chairman Tim Scott delayed the session to allow further bipartisan negotiations. The market's odds of the bill passing this year fell to 52%, down from 80%, reflecting increased uncertainty. Senator Elizabeth Warren also proposed 35 stricter amendments, seen as favorable to traditional banks.

Coinbase has withdrawn its support for the crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act, forcing the Senate Banking Committee to postpone the planned markup.

In a statement, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said the draft, which was scheduled for markup, had “too many issues” and was “bad” for the sector.

He highlighted the ban on tokenized equities, stablecoin rewards, and the prohibition of DeFi that would limit privacy as key deal breakers.

“This version (draft) would be materially worse than the current status quo. We’d rather have no bill than a bad bill. Hopefully, we can all get to a better draft.”

He added that crypto needs to be treated on a “level playing field with the rest of financial services.”

Senate Banking Committee postpones markup

Coinbase’s move reportedly derailed the markup scheduled for the 15th of January. In response, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) postponed the session to allow bipartisan negotiations to continue.

Scott added,

“I’ve spoken with leaders across the crypto industry, the financial sector, and my Democratic and Republican colleagues, and everyone remains at the table working in good faith.”

However, unlike the Senate Agriculture Committee, which also pushed its markup timeline to the last week of January, the Banking Committee didn’t share a new schedule as of press time.

Whether the Banking committee will align with the Agriculture’s schedule was unclear.

Meanwhile, Galaxy Head of Research Alex Thorn noted that Senator Elizabeth Warren filed 35 amendments to the crypto bill. These include stricter DeFi oversight and a proposed ban on tokenized stocks.

Taken together, the changes were largely viewed as a win for the banks, who had successfully pushed for limiting stablecoin rewards in the draft.

Market is 50/50 on the CLARITY Act

These last-minute amendments further diluted the bill, according to crypto supporters. And with the temporary pause on the bill momentum, the market was nearly 50/50 on the chance of it being passed into law this year.

At the time of writing, Polymarket showed a 52% chance of the bill becoming law.

That figure was down from nearly 80% just two days earlier. It reflects growing uncertainty, especially if unresolved issues spill into the U.S. election cycle.


Final Thoughts

  • The Senate Banking Committee has joined its Agriculture colleagues in postponing the markup of the crypto market structure bill.
  • Coinbase CEO said the industry would “rather have no bill than a bad bill.”

Related Questions

QWhy did Coinbase withdraw its support for the CLARITY Act?

ACoinbase CEO Brian Armstrong stated the draft had 'too many issues' and was 'bad' for the crypto sector, citing the ban on tokenized equities, stablecoin rewards, and the prohibition of DeFi that would limit privacy as key deal breakers.

QWhat was the immediate consequence of Coinbase's withdrawal of support?

AThe Senate Banking Committee postponed the planned markup session for the CLARITY Act that was scheduled for January 15th.

QAccording to the article, who is seen as the main beneficiary of the recent amendments to the bill?

AThe changes were largely viewed as a win for the banks, who had successfully pushed for limiting stablecoin rewards in the draft.

QWhat did Senator Elizabeth Warren propose in her amendments to the crypto bill?

ASenator Elizabeth Warren filed 35 amendments, which included stricter DeFi oversight and a proposed ban on tokenized stocks.

QWhat does the current market prediction (on Polymarket) indicate about the bill's chance of becoming law?

AAt the time of writing, Polymarket showed a 52% chance of the bill becoming law, down from nearly 80% just two days earlier, reflecting growing uncertainty.

Related Reads

Has the 'Digital Gold' Narrative for BTC Failed?

**Title: Has the "Digital Gold" Narrative for Bitcoin Failed?** The article argues that Bitcoin's "digital gold" narrative remains valid despite a recent sharp price decline (from a peak near $126k in Oct 2025 to briefly under $61k in Feb 2026). It presents a long-term investment framework based on three core points: **1. Viewing Bitcoin as an Asset:** Bitcoin is presented as a superior potential store of value compared to gold. Key arguments are its absolute scarcity (21 million cap), superior portability, and transparent auditability via its public ledger. While acknowledging its current use in early, volatile stages (~3-4% global adoption), the author draws parallels to the early, disruptive phases of the internet and e-commerce. **2. Understanding the Recent Downturn:** The current ~50% correction is framed as a predictable, consensus-driven cycle following its post-halving peak (the 2024 halving preceded the Oct 2025 high). A crucial factor is a historic "changing of hands": the influx of new institutional buyers via ETFs allowed early, low-cost holders (miners, OG believers) to take profits. The author notes that while severe, Bitcoin's historical drawdowns (e.g., 93% in 2011, 77% in 2021-22) have been progressively smaller, suggesting maturing holder structure and decreasing volatility over time. **3. The Long-Term Perspective:** The long-term thesis hinges on Bitcoin capturing a portion of gold's market value. With Bitcoin's market cap at ~$1.4 trillion (at $70k) versus gold's ~$20 trillion, significant upside potential exists if the "digital gold" narrative is partially realized. However, the author strongly cautions that short-term risks remain, the bottom is unpredictable, and high volatility is inherent. The real risk is not Bitcoin failing but poor personal position management (over-leverage, wrong capital) and a lack of deep understanding, which can force investors out during severe downturns. The conclusion uses Amazon's 95% crash post-2000 dot-com bubble and subsequent 42x recovery as an analogy. The ultimate question is not if Bitcoin's price will rise, but if an investor's strategy and conviction can withstand the volatility to see the long-term play out. The recent divergence (gold up, Bitcoin down) is posed not as a narrative failure, but as potential evidence of this ongoing, painful transition from a speculative asset to a mainstream allocation.

marsbit3h ago

Has the 'Digital Gold' Narrative for BTC Failed?

marsbit3h ago

Has BTC's 'Digital Gold' Narrative Failed?

The article discusses Bitcoin's "digital gold" narrative, its recent price drop, and long-term outlook through the perspective of "Jason". It argues the narrative is not a failure but that Bitcoin represents a superior, new asset class due to its fixed supply (21 million), portability, and auditability. The piece compares its current ~3-4% global adoption rate to early internet/e-commerce, suggesting significant growth potential. Regarding the 2025-2026 price decline (from ~$126k to briefly under $61k), the author views it as a predictable, consensus-driven sell-off within Bitcoin's ~4-year cycle post-halving, exacerbated by a major "handover" from early, low-cost holders to new institutional buyers via ETFs. A key observation is that historical peak-to-trough drawdowns have lessened over time (e.g., 93% in 2011 to ~50% in 2026), indicating maturing volatility as holder structure changes. For the long term, the author uses a simple framework: Bitcoin's total market cap (~$1.4T at $70k) is only about 7% of gold's (~$20T). Even capturing 30-50% of gold's value would imply substantial upside. However, the article strongly cautions against viewing this as investment advice, emphasizing extreme volatility and the critical importance of risk management, position sizing, and deep fundamental understanding to survive severe drawdowns. It concludes by drawing a parallel to Amazon's 95% crash in 2000 and subsequent 42x recovery, stressing that the key is surviving market cycles to realize long-term potential.

链捕手4h ago

Has BTC's 'Digital Gold' Narrative Failed?

链捕手4h ago

From Code to Cognition: A Ten-Thousand-Word Guide to the Evolution of the Robot Brain

"From Code to Cognition: The Evolution of Robot Brains" The journey of robotic intelligence has shifted dramatically from manually coded systems to AI-driven brains. For decades, robots relied on layered software stacks—perception, state estimation, planning, control—each handcrafted. While predictable, they lacked adaptability. The 2010s saw deep learning revolutionize perception (e.g., object detection) and control (via reinforcement learning), but learned skills remained narrow. The arrival of Large Language Models (LLMs) marked a turning point. LLMs acted as high-level planners, interpreting natural language instructions and generating sequences of actions for traditional robotic systems to execute. However, true integration came with Visual-Language-Action (VLA) models, which fused vision, language, and motion prediction into a single network. Pioneered by models like RT-2 and open-source projects like OpenVLA, VLAs enable robots to reason and act directly from visual input and commands. The most advanced humanoid robots now employ a "dual-brain" architecture: a slow-thinking, large VLA (System 2) for reasoning and planning, and a fast-reacting, small network (System 1) for high-frequency motion control, sometimes with an even lower-level System 0 for balance. This split balances cognition with the physics of real-time movement. Computation is split between onboard hardware (e.g., NVIDIA Jetson) for safety-critical control loops and cloud/edge servers for non-critical tasks like learning and interfaces. A crucial driver is the open-source ecosystem—models like GR00T and OpenVLA allow startups to build upon pre-trained brains and fine-tune them with their own data, accelerating development. Despite progress, current systems struggle with recovery from errors, sample inefficiency, and long-horizon tasks. This has spurred the rise of **World Models**—neural networks that predict the consequences of actions. By simulating possible futures before acting (like NVIDIA Cosmos or Meta V-JEPA), robots can plan, recover, and generalize better. This represents the next frontier: shifting intelligence from learned reactions to an internal model of physics and cause-and-effect. The field is rapidly evolving. While not yet at its "ChatGPT moment," the convergence of cheaper hardware, scalable simulation, and world models points toward robots that are increasingly capable, adaptive, and useful. The question is shifting from "what can robots do?" to "what *should* they do?"

marsbit4h ago

From Code to Cognition: A Ten-Thousand-Word Guide to the Evolution of the Robot Brain

marsbit4h ago

AI Bubble Is Bursting

The AI Bubble is Bursting: A Necessary Purge on the Path to Ubiquitous Intelligence Market volatility has reignited debates about an AI bubble, with figures like Ray Dalio pointing to high valuations. However, this parallels the dot-com bubble, which, despite its crash, laid the physical infrastructure for today's internet era. The current AI investment frenzy, with tech giants planning trillions in infrastructure spending far outstripping current AI application revenues, appears similarly imbalanced. This 'bubble' is seen as an inevitable phase for a disruptive technology, paying the "innovation tax." Critically, AI inference costs have plummeted over 99.7% since 2023, making intelligence nearly free at the margin. This hasn't reduced spending but has instead unlocked massive new demand, as seen in enterprise AI cloud expenditure tripling. This follows the Jevons Paradox: efficiency gains lead to greater total consumption. The market is now entering a cleansing phase, weeding out speculative ventures lacking real moats. The deeper shift is a move from capital expenditure (CapEx) on hardware to value creation in operational expenditure (OpEx) through AI applications that solve real industry problems. While infrastructure valuations are high, rapid earnings growth from widespread AI adoption across sectors—from manufacturing and finance to law and healthcare—may digest these valuations over time. Ultimately, this creative destruction will leave behind robust infrastructure and optimized models, cheaply powering an AI-augmented future for all industries, much as the internet became indispensable after its own bubble burst. The core productive potential remains undiminished.

链捕手4h ago

AI Bubble Is Bursting

链捕手4h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片