Crypto Market Structure Bill Nears Key Moment As CFTC Chair Signals Progress Within Months

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-02-04Actualizado a 2026-02-04

Resumen

Newly appointed CFTC Chair Michael Selig advocates for the passage of the crypto market structure bill (CLARITY Act), arguing it could establish the U.S. as the global "gold standard" in crypto regulation. He emphasizes that the legislation would provide long-needed clarity by defining a token taxonomy and clarifying regulatory jurisdictions, challenging the current approach of treating most digital assets as securities. Selig believes the bill could reach President Trump's desk within months, aided by executive support. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats are planning a closed-door meeting to discuss the bill, which recently stalled in the Senate Banking Committee due to industry opposition, despite passing in the Agriculture Committee.

As uncertainty grows around the fate of the crypto market structure bill (CLARITY Act), newly appointed Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Chair Michael Selig is making a strong case for its passage.

Selig argues that the legislation moving through Congress could position the United States as the global benchmark — or “gold standard” — for crypto regulation, addressing what he described as years of regulatory ambiguity that have held the industry back.

Clear Crypto Rules Could Arrive Within Months

Speaking in an interview with FOX Business, Selig said the US has long suffered from a lack of clear oversight for digital assets, forcing innovation and capital to move offshore.

He explained that the proposed crypto market structure legislation is designed to introduce long‐needed clarity by defining a “token taxonomy” and clearly outlining which regulators have authority over different parts of the crypto market.

For the first time, he added, developers and investors may soon have a framework that clearly defines what qualifies as a security, what does not, and how digital assets should be treated under US law.

Selig also challenged the approach of treating nearly all digital assets as securities, calling it outdated. He argued that many cryptocurrencies function more like commodities and should therefore fall under the CFTC’s jurisdiction rather than being regulated exclusively by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Looking ahead, Selig said he believes the market structure bill could reach President Donald Trump’s desk within the next couple of months. He also praised the president’s leadership and vocal support of the crypto sector, suggesting that executive backing could help push the legislation across the finish line.

Senate Democrats Plan Closed‐Door Meeting

Meanwhile, activity is picking up on Capitol Hill. Crypto journalist Eleanor Terrett reported on X (formerly Twitter) that Senate Democrats are planning to reconvene for a closed‐door meeting on crypto market structure.

The meeting, expected to take place this week, would mark the first member‐level Democratic caucus discussion on the issue since the Senate Banking Committee postponed its markup last month.

This comes as the delayed markup occurred last month after pushback from the industry. That opposition included crypto exchange Coinbase withdrawing its support over provisions related to tokenized equities, decentralized finance, and stablecoin rewards and yields.

As a result, the bill stalled in the Senate Banking Committee, increasing the uncertainty surrounding its eventual passing schedule, even though the Senate Agriculture Committee’s version of the bill passed during last week’s vote.

The daily chart shows the total digital asset market cap’s drop to $2.5 trillion on Tuesday. Source: TOTAL on TradingView.com

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main argument made by CFTC Chair Michael Selig in favor of the crypto market structure bill?

AMichael Selig argues that the legislation could position the United States as the global benchmark or 'gold standard' for crypto regulation, addressing years of regulatory ambiguity that have held the industry back and forced innovation and capital to move offshore.

QAccording to Selig, what key definitional framework might the proposed legislation provide for the first time?

AFor the first time, developers and investors may soon have a framework that clearly defines what qualifies as a security, what does not, and how digital assets should be treated under US law.

QWhich regulatory approach does Selig criticize as outdated, and what alternative does he propose?

ASelig criticizes the approach of treating nearly all digital assets as securities as outdated. He argues that many cryptocurrencies function more like commodities and should therefore fall under the CFTC’s jurisdiction rather than being regulated exclusively by the SEC.

QWhat recent development is mentioned regarding Senate Democrats and this legislation?

ASenate Democrats are planning to reconvene for a closed-door meeting on crypto market structure, which would be the first member-level Democratic caucus discussion on the issue since the Senate Banking Committee postponed its markup last month.

QWhy did the Senate Banking Committee's markup of the bill get postponed last month?

AThe markup was postponed after pushback from the industry, including crypto exchange Coinbase withdrawing its support over provisions related to tokenized equities, decentralized finance, and stablecoin rewards and yields.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbitHace 23 min(s)

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbitHace 23 min(s)

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

For years, the semiconductor equipment industry followed an unwritten "iron rule": suppliers offered steep discounts for new tool introductions (Design-in) and faced consistent price pressure during repeat orders, especially during market downturns. This long-standing buyer's market dynamic is now being upended. Recently, SK Hynix's primary equipment suppliers have reportedly requested a 3-4% price *increase*, a nearly unprecedented move. This shift is driven by a severe supply-demand imbalance fueled by the AI compute boom. Securing equipment has become an urgent arms race as chipmakers' expansion speed dictates their ability to fulfill massive AI chip orders. Key areas feeling the strain include: **TCB (Thermal Compression Bonding) Equipment:** Demand is exploding, driven by the simultaneous needs of HBM4 memory stacking, AI chip Chip-on-Substrate (C2S), and logic Chiplet Chip-on-Wafer (C2W) packaging. Players like Hanmi Semiconductor, Hanwha Semitech, and ASMPT are receiving major orders. While hybrid bonding is seen as the future, TCB remains the pragmatic choice for HBM4 mass production, with its lifecycle extended by relaxed specifications and ongoing technological upgrades. **Test Equipment Bottlenecks:** Ironically, AI-driven shortages are now crippling test equipment manufacturing. Critical components like FPGAs, Driver ICs, and CPUs face severe shortages and extended lead times (up to 52 weeks for FPGAs), as AI data center and server vendors prioritize supply. This creates a paradoxical cycle: AI chip shortages drive fab expansion, which requires more test equipment, whose production is delayed because its key parts are diverted to make AI chips. The industry is entering a broad, AI-powered upcycle. SEMI forecasts global semiconductor equipment sales to hit a record $156 billion by 2027, fueled by investment in advanced logic/foundry, HBM-driven DRAM, and advanced packaging (like CoWoS). Major players like TSMC, SK Hynix, and Micron are aggressively ramping capital expenditure. In conclusion, leading equipment vendors are no longer just selling tools; they are selling the critical capability to deliver AI-era capacity. Pricing power is shifting decisively to those with indispensable technology in key process nodes like advanced logic, HBM, and advanced packaging, rewriting the industry's traditional power structure.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片