Treasury Urges Agreement Between Crypto Firms and Banks to Advance CLARITY Act

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-02-10Last updated on 2026-02-10

Abstract

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is urging crypto firms, banks, and lawmakers to compromise to advance the stalled Clarity Act. With the bill stuck in the Senate, he emphasized that waiting for a perfect law is unrealistic and risks U.S. innovation and global crypto leadership. This push comes ahead of a crucial White House meeting. A key debate centers on whether stablecoin companies should pay users interest. Banks fear this could drain deposits and weaken the traditional system, while crypto firms argue yield is essential for competition. Another contentious issue is crypto firms' limited access to the Federal Reserve's payment system. If no agreement is reached, lawmakers may delay the vote again, creating market uncertainty, despite former President Trump's goal of making the U.S. the "crypto capital of the world."

Scott Bessent, the Treasury Secretary, is pushing the crypto firm, banks, and lawmakers to stop fighting and find a compromise so that the Clarity Act can be moved forward. His statements have come right before the key White House meeting.

Right now, the bill has been stuck in the Senate, and crypto firms and banks met last week but failed to agree. So another meeting is scheduled today to try again. Bessent made it clear that waiting for the perfect law is not realistic, and it could create uncertainty and slow innovation in the U.S.

Scott Bessent’s reply to Brian Armstrong’s statement

Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase, has argued that it may be better not to have a bill instead of passing the bill that creates the problem. Scott disagrees with his statements, and he believes that some regulations are better than none. He warned that a few groups refusing to compromise could prevent the U.S. from becoming a global crypto leader.

Key issue for the Debate

One of the most sensitive issues is whether the stablecoin companies pay users interest. Banks worry that if the stablecoins offer yield, then people would start moving money out of the bank deposit, and this could weaken the traditional banking system. On the other hand, crypto companies argue that yield helps them to compete, and users expect returns similar to those of savings products. Another topic is limited access for the crypto firms to the payment system run by the Federal Reserve. This created more tension between the crypto firms and banks.

Today’s meeting is so crucial and could decide whether the bill moves forward and how stablecoins will work in the U.S. with clearer operating rules for the companies. If no agreement is reached, then the lawmakers may delay the vote again. The analyst says that this would affect the market and create uncertainty. President Donald Trump has repeatedly said that he wants the nation to be the “crypto capital of the world.”

Highlighted Crypto News:

Telegram Moves Toward Built-In Crypto Payments With TON Pay Launch

TagsClarity ACTCrypto

Related Questions

QWhat is the main purpose of the Treasury Secretary's push for compromise between crypto firms and banks?

AThe Treasury Secretary is pushing for compromise to advance the CLARITY Act, which has been stuck in the Senate, to prevent uncertainty and avoid slowing innovation in the U.S. crypto sector.

QHow does Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's view differ from Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong's regarding the proposed legislation?

AScott Bessent believes some regulation is better than none and warns that refusing to pass a bill could prevent the U.S. from becoming a global crypto leader, while Brian Armstrong argues it may be better to have no bill than to pass a problematic one.

QWhat is one key issue causing debate between banks and crypto companies regarding stablecoins?

AA key issue is whether stablecoin companies should pay users interest, with banks worrying this could draw deposits away from traditional banks and weaken the banking system, while crypto firms argue yield helps them compete and meet user expectations.

QWhy is the meeting mentioned in the article considered crucial?

AThe meeting is crucial because it could determine whether the CLARITY Act moves forward and establish clearer operating rules for stablecoins in the U.S.; failure to reach an agreement may lead to further delays in voting and create market uncertainty.

QWhat has been President Donald Trump's stated goal regarding cryptocurrency in the U.S.?

APresident Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that he wants the United States to become the 'crypto capital of the world.'

Related Reads

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Survive?

If the AI Bubble is Bursting, Who Will Remain? The debate over an AI bubble is intensifying, with figures like Ray Dalio warning of high levels and Jensen Huang seeing immense, early-stage opportunity. Both views hold truth: a speculative bubble in capital markets likely exists, mirroring the dot-com era, but the underlying technological shift is real and transformative. History shows that while bubbles burst—wiping out overvalued companies and speculative capital—they often leave behind critical physical and digital infrastructure. The dot-com bust, for instance, eliminated many firms but left the global fiber optic networks and data centers that enabled the rise of Amazon, Netflix, and cloud computing. Today's massive AI infrastructure investments (projected at trillions by 2030) in data centers, power, cooling, and GPUs may follow a similar path, creating the foundation for future applications. A key divergence from past bubbles is the "Jevons Paradox" effect in AI. As the cost of AI inference has plummeted by over 99.7% since 2023, enterprise spending on AI has skyrocketed. Cheap "tokens" have unlocked vast, previously uneconomical use cases, moving AI from simple chatbots into core business workflows—code generation, legal document review, scientific simulation, and financial analysis. The market is now in a phase of self-correction, weeding out superficial "API-wrapper" startups, but this cleansing process strengthens the ecosystem. The long-term trajectory is clear. The value is gradually shifting from capital expenditure (CapEx) on hardware to operational expenditure (OpEx) on transformative applications. As AI becomes a utility, the winners will be firms that deeply integrate it to solve vertical industry problems in law, healthcare, finance, and manufacturing. The泡沫 will recede, but the foundational shift towards an AI-powered era across all sectors is irreversible. The underlying productive force of AI contains no bubble.

marsbit33m ago

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Survive?

marsbit33m ago

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Remain?

**Summary: If the AI Bubble is Bursting, What Will Remain?** The debate around an AI bubble is intensifying, with figures like Ray Dalio warning of high valuations while Jensen Huang sees immense opportunity. This echoes the dot-com bubble, which saw massive wealth destruction but ultimately left behind critical infrastructure like undersea cables and broadband, enabling future giants like Amazon and Netflix. Similarly, today's AI boom involves trillions invested in data centers, power, cooling, and GPUs, while application-layer revenue remains comparatively modest. This investment-disparity signals a bubble. However, the core technological progress is real and accelerating. AI inference costs have plummeted by over 99.7% since 2023, making intelligence increasingly cheap and accessible. This cost collapse is unlocking vast new demand. Instead of reducing spending, enterprises are tripling their AI cloud expenditure. Cheap "tokens" enable AI to move beyond simple chatbots into complex workflows—automating code writing, legal document review, financial analysis, and scientific research. This follows "Jevons's paradox": improved efficiency leads to greater total consumption. The market is now undergoing a necessary purification, weeding out "API-wrapper" startups with no real moat. The deeper evolution involves a shift from capital expenditure (CapEx) on infrastructure to operational expenditure (OpEx) on value-creation in applications. While hardware vendors currently profit most, long-term value will migrate to AI-native firms solving vertical industry problems. Ultimately, a market correction will cleanse speculative excess but will not reverse the AI+ trend. The massive physical and algorithmic infrastructure being built will endure, becoming a cheap, utility-like foundation. Just as the internet became indispensable to all industries post-2000, AI is poised to empower and redefine every sector, moving society irreversibly toward an intelligence-augmented era. The bubble may burst, but the underlying productive momentum is solid.

链捕手39m ago

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Remain?

链捕手39m ago

Microsoft CEO: In the AI Era, How Do You Define a Company's Moat?

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella argues that in the AI era, a company's true competitive edge, or "moat," is not determined by choosing the single most powerful model, but by its ability to build a continuous "learning loop." This system integrates and evolves by connecting human workflows, domain expertise, organizational judgment, and employee experience. He posits that future companies will accumulate two types of capital: Human Capital (employee knowledge, judgment, creativity) and "Token Capital" (a firm's own built and owned AI capabilities). Importantly, AI amplifies rather than devalues human capital. Human direction is essential to guide progress, as computational power alone is aimless. The core opportunity lies in creating a closed-loop system where human and token capital reinforce each other in a compound, self-improving cycle. A company must be able to preserve its unique institutional knowledge—its "company veteran" expertise—even if it switches underlying general-purpose AI models. This requires private evaluation benchmarks, reinforcement learning environments based on internal data, and queryable knowledge bases. Nadella warns against a future where economic value is concentrated by a few dominant models that commoditize entire industries' knowledge. Instead, the priority should be building a broad "frontier ecosystem" where every company, industry, and nation can own its learning loop. This allows organizations to retain control of their intellectual property, amplify employee capabilities, and ensure the economic value created by AI is captured within their own businesses and communities. True corporate sovereignty in the AI age comes from turning organizational knowledge into a compounding system that creates enduring, defensible value.

marsbit1h ago

Microsoft CEO: In the AI Era, How Do You Define a Company's Moat?

marsbit1h ago

ETFs Are Just the Ticket: The True Institutionalization of Bitcoin Is Happening Where You Can't See It

Beyond the Bitcoin ETF spotlight, a deeper institutionalization is underway, leveraging Bitcoin as a foundational financial primitive. Institutions are using Bitcoin for purposes long reserved for assets like U.S. Treasuries and gold: as collateral for loans, insurance reserves, and the backbone of rated bonds. Examples include a Barbados-based insurer capitalizing with $40M in Bitcoin reserves and Ledn's $188M securitization of Bitcoin-backed loans, which received the first-ever investment-grade rating (BBB-) from S&P for a digital asset-backed security. This structure was stress-tested during a 27% price drop in early 2026, triggering automatic liquidations that functioned as designed but revealed the systemic risk of synchronized selling across leveraged positions. Infrastructure is evolving to support this, with platforms like Anchorage Digital's Atlas network enabling secure, institutional-grade settlement and collateral management. Strategies like basis trades and corporate treasuries (exemplified by companies like MicroStrategy issuing billions in equity and debt to fund Bitcoin acquisitions) further integrate Bitcoin into financial mechanics. While ETFs solved "how to own" Bitcoin, these developments answer "what to do with it," embedding the asset into the working machinery of finance—as collateral upon which loans, derivatives, and structured products are built. The real, enduring institutional shift is happening in these largely invisible plumbing and financing systems.

marsbit1h ago

ETFs Are Just the Ticket: The True Institutionalization of Bitcoin Is Happening Where You Can't See It

marsbit1h ago

ZEC Co-Founder Responds to Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Orchard Pool to Be Sealed

ZEC Co-Founder Addresses Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Plans to Sunset Orchard Pool A security vulnerability was recently discovered in Zcash's Orchard shielded pool, raising key concerns. The primary questions are whether the flaw was exploited, if user funds are safe, whether users can verify the total ZEC supply, and if other similar vulnerabilities exist. Analysis suggests the vulnerability was likely not exploited prior to its discovery. It was found proactively by a researcher using specialized tools, not due to an active breach. The development team and mining pools acted quickly to contain the issue. Typical financially-motivated attacks would likely have left visible on-chain evidence, which has not been observed. User funds in Orchard are considered safe and should be recoverable, assuming no prior exploitation. If the flaw was never used, all legitimate funds can be withdrawn. The article outlines risks associated with moving funds to transparent addresses or other pools, but concludes that leaving assets in place is a reasonable option. Currently, users cannot independently verify that the total ZEC supply hasn't been inflated due to this bug. However, the planned Ironwood network upgrade is designed to resolve this. It will permanently close the Orchard pool to new deposits and internal transfers, allowing only withdrawals. This mechanism will cap total withdrawals at the amount of legitimately deposited funds, enabling anyone to cryptographically verify the supply post-upgrade. Multiple teams, including Shielded Labs, have conducted extensive audits focused on counterfeiting vulnerabilities, assisted by advanced AI tools. No additional flaws of this type have been found so far, increasing confidence that no other similar undisclosed vulnerabilities exist. In summary, evidence indicates the Orchard bug was probably not used, user funds are secure, and no other counterfeiting flaws are currently known. The upcoming Ironwood upgrade will restore users' ability to independently verify the total ZEC supply, closing this chapter.

Foresight News1h ago

ZEC Co-Founder Responds to Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Orchard Pool to Be Sealed

Foresight News1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片