Why Wall Street says ‘no bill is better than a bad U.S. crypto bill’

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-01-16Actualizado a 2026-01-16

Resumen

Industry players strongly oppose the recently proposed U.S. crypto market structure bill, arguing it fails to provide adequate regulatory clarity. While the legislation aims to classify digital assets and define regulatory roles, key figures like Bitwise CEO Hunter Horsley and Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong criticize specific provisions—such as restrictions on asset tokenization and stablecoin rewards—as counterproductive. Armstrong notably stated, “no bill is better than a bad bill,” emphasizing that overly restrictive rules could limit competition and exclude Americans from emerging financial opportunities. Despite ongoing negotiations, concerns over consumer protection, pension risks, and rising crypto-related fraud continue to drive opposition. The industry seeks clearer guidelines, especially for DeFi and institutional involvement, but believes innovation will continue regardless of the bill’s outcome.

Industry players have pushed back strongly against the recently released draft of the crypto market structure bill, which lawmakers scheduled for a vote earlier this week.

Although the bill aims to deliver long-awaited regulatory clarity, it has failed to win broad support across the sector.

The legislation aims to define how digital assets are classified and clarify the roles of regulatory agencies in overseeing the space. It also seeks to outline which products and services crypto companies can legally offer, while prioritizing consumer protection for U.S. citizens.

The industry has reacted far more critically to this bill than to earlier crypto legislation, such as the GENIUS Act, which established a stablecoin framework and won broad support.

Why the pushback?

Hunter Horsley, CEO of Bitwise Asset Management, said regulators have made progress in supporting the crypto industry, but they still leave major clarity gaps.

Speaking to CNBC, Horsley highlighted concerns about the bill. He pointed out that certain provisions, such as restrictions on asset tokenization and the ban on stablecoin rewards, pose significant challenges.

He added that there is strong interest from large institutions, including Bitwise clients, banks, wealth management firms, and hedge funds, all of whom need clearer regulatory language around DeFi.

“There are a lot of firms that want to tokenize securities, equities... some of the world’s largest asset managers. They want, if possible, to know clearly what the rules of the road are.”

Horsley emphasized that the situation is no longer driven solely by the crypto industry. Traditional financial institutions are now actively looking to bring their clients into the ecosystem, a shift he believes may be influencing the structure and direction of the current bill.

“I don’t think it’s coming from a place of attempting to be counterproductive. I think the reality is that these are complex issues, and there’s a lot of voices.”

He concluded by stressing that the outcome of this bill is not a “make or break” moment for crypto, adding that innovation in the space will continue regardless.

Coinbase CEO also pushes back

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has echoed similar concerns, stating that “no bill is better than a bad bill,” as the company withdrew its support for the current version of the legislation.

Armstrong acknowledged that while some elements of the bill do not fully align with the interests of American consumers, Coinbase remains open to engaging with lawmakers to find a workable path forward, according to his CNBC interview.

He argued that banks must not use legislation to limit competition or “put their thumb on the scale,” warning that this approach would exclude Americans from emerging financial opportunities.

To illustrate his point, Armstrong highlighted how stablecoin rewards could offer users yields of up to 3.8%, compared to an average of 0.14% (or 14 basis points) from traditional banks on dollar deposits. He also noted that stablecoins are typically backed by reserves such as U.S. Treasury bills, while banks operate on a fractional reserve basis.

Despite the disagreements, negotiations remain active. Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott confirmed that discussions are ongoing, stating that “everyone is at the table working in good faith.”

Pushback and hurdles

Opposition to the bill has been building for months, as various stakeholders seek to protect their interests.

In December 2025, AMBCrypto reported that the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) urged the Senate to reconsider the legislation, warning that it could place “profound risk” on workers’ pensions due to the volatility associated with crypto assets.

Concerns over fraud have also intensified. Crypto-related scams have surged, with an estimated $14 billion lost to fraud in 2025 alone, according to blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis.

Market sentiment has reflected these concerns. The broader crypto market has experienced volatility over the past day, with the total market capitalization standing at approximately $3.23 trillion.


Final Thoughts

  • Bitwise CEO calls for greater clarity around how the bill addresses DeFi and asset tokenization.
  • Industry players push back on the legislation, although negotiations remain ongoing as all parties stay engaged in discussions.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main reason Wall Street and crypto industry players are saying 'no bill is better than a bad bill'?

AThey believe the current draft of the crypto market structure bill contains problematic provisions, such as restrictions on asset tokenization and a ban on stablecoin rewards, which could stifle innovation and limit financial opportunities for Americans, making it a 'bad bill'.

QAccording to Bitwise CEO Hunter Horsley, what is a key concern for large institutions regarding the proposed crypto bill?

ALarge institutions, including banks and asset managers, need clearer regulatory language specifically around DeFi (Decentralized Finance) and the rules for tokenizing securities and equities.

QWhat specific financial comparison did Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong make to argue against the bill's restrictions?

AArmstrong compared the potential 3.8% yield from stablecoin rewards to the average 0.14% yield offered by traditional banks on dollar deposits, highlighting the better returns consumers could get with stablecoins, which are often backed by safer reserves like U.S. Treasury bills.

QWhat are some of the major risks cited by opponents of the bill, such as the American Federation of Teachers?

AOpponents warn the bill could place 'profound risk' on workers' pensions due to the volatility of crypto assets and point to the surge in crypto-related fraud, with an estimated $14 billion lost to scams in 2025 alone.

QDespite the strong pushback, what is the current status of negotiations on the bill according to the Senate Banking Committee Chair?

ASenate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott confirmed that negotiations are still active, stating that 'everyone is at the table working in good faith' to find a path forward.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Bitcoin Withdrawals Continue: 8 Years of Storage in a Coldcard Cold Wallet Ended in Zero

Coldcard Hardware Wallet Hacked: Losses Mount Due to Vulnerable Seed Generation A critical vulnerability in Coldcard hardware wallets has led to a continued wave of fund thefts. According to Galaxy Research, the total stolen has reached 1,367.05 BTC (approx. $88.6 million) from 4,585 addresses, a significant increase from the initial 594.5 BTC reported on July 30, 2026. Most of the stolen funds remain on the attackers' addresses. The issue is not with the current firmware, which Coinkite has updated, but with seed phrases generated on vulnerable devices between March 2021 and the release of fixed firmware versions. Due to a programmer error, devices switched from using a hardware random number generator to the software-based Yasmarang generator, which was initialized with publicly accessible data like the chip's serial number. This made the seed phrases predictable through offline brute-force attacks, meaning wallets remain at risk until funds are moved to a new wallet generated with the patched firmware. Affected devices include Mk2/Mk3 with firmware 4.0.1–4.1.9 (and up to 5.0.3), Mk4/Mk5 up to version 5.6.0, and Q models up to 1.5.0Q. The only exceptions are seeds created with a high-entropy method like at least 50 independent dice rolls or a strong unique BIP-39 passphrase. All other owners must generate a new seed on the fixed firmware and transfer their assets. A case highlighting the human impact involves a 39-year-old long-term investor who lost 2 BTC (approx. $130,000) in minutes. He had accumulated the Bitcoin over eight years through physical labor, viewing it as a financial lifeline and a retirement plan in a country suffering from hyperinflation. His story underscores that even conservative "buy and hold in cold storage" strategies can be compromised by such underlying technical flaws. From a technical perspective, this incident echoes historical failures where weak random number generators undermined cryptographic security, challenging the assumption that offline storage is automatically foolproof.

cryptonews.ruHace 2 hora(s)

Bitcoin Withdrawals Continue: 8 Years of Storage in a Coldcard Cold Wallet Ended in Zero

cryptonews.ruHace 2 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片