‘Attempts to hijack the CLARITY Act are shameful’: Trump advisor slams banks

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-03-11Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-11

Introduzione

White House advisor Patrick Witt criticizes the banking lobby for opposing the pro-innovation CLARITY Act, calling attempts to turn it into an anti-competition bill "shameful." The dispute centers on stablecoin rewards, which banks argue create an uneven playing field and risk deposit flight, potentially reducing bank lending. Stablecoin issuers view restrictions as a threat to their business model and cite competition with China's digital yuan. Lawmakers propose limiting types of stablecoin reward activities as a compromise, but the bill's future remains uncertain without resolution.

The White House continues to express disappointment with the banking lobby’s hardline against the crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act.

The two industries, the crypto and banking sectors, have failed to reach an amicable agreement on stablecoin rewards. The stablecoin rewards issue has stalled the bill’s progress since early this year.

At a recent bankers’ summit in Washington, the industry maintained a hardline stance against any compromise on the bill, prompting criticism from the White House.

In response, Trump’s crypto advisor, Patrick Witt, said,

“The CLARITY Act must remain a pro-innovation piece of legislation. Attempts to hijack the legislative process and turn it into an anti-competition bill are shameful.”

Bankers’ plea

Witt’s statement followed Rob Nichols, president of the American Bankers Association, an advocacy group, who framed the current dispute as ‘anti-competitive.’

During the Washington summit, Nichols cautioned,

“Our industry welcomes competition and innovation...what we don’t support is an uneven playing field.”

Since last year, the traditional banking sector has maintained that stablecoin rewards will lead to deposit flight and harm the financial system.

The industry argues that the U.S. stablecoin law, the GENIUS Act, created a loophole that allows intermediaries to share yield with users, thereby bypassing the direct reward ban imposed on issuers.

To mitigate this, banks want the ban extended to intermediaries as well. This would mean amending the GENIUS Act or imposing the ban in the CLARITY Act.

However, stablecoin issuers view this as a threat to their business model. In fact, beyond disrupting their model, supporters view stablecoin yield as a national security issue, citing China’s push in the sector with rewards for digital yuan.

Proposed CLARITY Act compromise

Senators have tried to bring the two sides into a compromise on the issue.

During the banks’ summit, Democrat Senator for Maryland, Angela Alsobrooks, stressed that each faction will be ‘just a little bit unhappy’ but will help push for clear rules for the sector.

“We absolutely have to have these protections to prevent the deposit flight, but we’re going to probably have to make some compromises.”

Congressional Research Service (CRS) estimates that the stablecoin yield could reduce bank lending by $65 billion to $1.26 trillion, because the GENIUS Act prohibits lending of stablecoin reserves. The CRS urged banks to offer higher interest rates to depositors to remain competitive.

The compromise lawmakers have been pushing for is to narrow the types of stablecoin activity crypto platforms can allow to receive stablecoin rewards.

However, the banks’ opposition has faced a series of criticisms from the White House for the past few days. As such, the path forward for the CLARITY Act remains uncertain unless the concerned stakeholders resolve the stablecoin yield issue.


Final Summary

  • White House slammed banks for framing the CLARITY Act as an ‘anti-competition’ bill.
  • The banking industry reiterated its concerns about stablecoin yields during a recent meeting.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main criticism expressed by Trump's crypto advisor, Patrick Witt, regarding the CLARITY Act?

APatrick Witt criticized attempts to hijack the legislative process and turn the CLARITY Act into an anti-competition bill, stating that such attempts are shameful and that the act must remain a pro-innovation piece of legislation.

QWhy does the banking industry oppose stablecoin rewards according to the article?

AThe banking industry opposes stablecoin rewards because they believe it will lead to deposit flight and harm the financial system, arguing that the GENIUS Act created a loophole allowing intermediaries to share yield with users, bypassing the direct reward ban on issuers.

QWhat compromise have lawmakers proposed regarding stablecoin rewards in the CLARITY Act?

ALawmakers have proposed narrowing the types of stablecoin activity that crypto platforms can allow to receive stablecoin rewards as a compromise to address concerns from both the banking and crypto sectors.

QWhat did the American Bankers Association president, Rob Nichols, say about competition during the Washington summit?

ARob Nichols stated that the banking industry welcomes competition and innovation but does not support an uneven playing field, framing the current dispute over the CLARITY Act as 'anti-competitive'.

QAccording to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), what impact could stablecoin yield have on bank lending?

AThe Congressional Research Service estimates that stablecoin yield could reduce bank lending by $65 billion to $1.26 trillion because the GENIUS Act prohibits lending of stablecoin reserves, and they urged banks to offer higher interest rates to depositors to remain competitive.

Letture associate

Vitalik: We Need to Create Sanctuaries, Not Fight AI

In a recent interview, Vitalik Buterin, founder of Ethereum, addresses the central anxiety of the AI era. He argues the primary risk isn't AI's intelligence, but human passivity—ceding decisions, privacy, and agency to centralized systems or "super AIs" for a sense of "disempowering safety." His solution is not to fight AI, but to build "sanctuary technologies." These are optional, non-totalizing spaces that protect users while preserving their sovereignty and privacy. Ethereum is presented as a prime example, offering a parallel financial system one can freely choose, not a fix for the old one. Reflecting on his journey from a 19-year-old on "autopilot" to an active "pilot," Vitalik notes the world reinvents itself every 5-10 years. To keep up, individuals must actively pilot their lives, not be passive passengers. He stresses that active learning vastly outperforms passive learning, even with equal time invested. His practical advice for builders and individuals in the AI age includes: periodically forcing oneself to do tasks manually to keep the mind engaged; prioritizing active learning and verification over outsourcing answers; building tools that help retain human agency; not outsourcing all strategic thinking to AI; and preserving serendipity through real-world interactions. Ultimately, Buterin redefines Ethereum/crypto's role: not to win against or fix the old world, but to provide a free, optional alternative. The core message is that as AI grows more powerful, the truly scarce resource will be proactive humans who retain their sovereignty, privacy, and capacity for independent thought. The era demands not less tool use, but more intentional and active use of technology.

链捕手2 h fa

Vitalik: We Need to Create Sanctuaries, Not Fight AI

链捕手2 h fa

Conversation with Patagon Founder: Revealing the Inside Story of Anthropic's Secondary Market

**Summary: Inside Anthropic's Massive, Opaque Secondary Market** In a revealing interview, Patagon founder Dio Casares pulls back the curtain on the booming, high-risk secondary market for shares in companies like Anthropic. This private market, fueled by companies staying private longer and massive funding rounds, is estimated to involve hundreds of billions of dollars. Casares distinguishes between two types of "secondary" trading: 1. **Company-approved SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) sales:** Where new capital flows into the company, often facilitated by select private equity firms. Anthropic supports this to manage liquidity and pre-IPO selling pressure. 2. **The "gray" market:** Platforms like Hive and Forge that match buyers and sellers, often creating pricing confusion and competing with official funding rounds. These intermediaries are widely disliked by companies. The market structure is complex and fragmented, relying heavily on personal connections. Brokers connect buyers and sellers, often layering multiple SPVs to pool capital, with single transaction fees as high as 10%. Strikingly, some finance professionals earn more from this trading than from their primary investment roles. **Key risks highlighted include:** * **High Fraud Rates:** An estimated 10-20% of transactions involve fake stock certificates or sellers who take payment without having the shares. * **Complex, Risky Structures:** Nested SPVs, "forward contracts" on employee equity, and tokenized private equity create layers of opacity. This is exemplified by a recent incident where an xAI employee's shares were revoked after an espionage allegation, leaving buyers empty-handed. * **Post-IPO "Settlement Hell":** After an IPO, delays in distributing shares through multiple SPV layers and decisions by fund managers to hold onto shares could trigger years of lawsuits as downstream investors are locked out. **For small investors** holding positions through tokenized vehicles or layered SPVs, it's often impossible to verify the underlying asset. Casares advises caution: if the investment feels wrong, consider exiting. As the private market now surpasses IPO fundraising, this "wild west" ecosystem faces a looming reckoning. While it will likely professionalize, the post-IPO period for a company like Anthropic could unleash a wave of disputes, exposing the vulnerabilities built into this frenzied, largely unregulated marketplace.

marsbit4 h fa

Conversation with Patagon Founder: Revealing the Inside Story of Anthropic's Secondary Market

marsbit4 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片