‘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

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

In recent months, the rapid growth of the AI industry has attracted significant talent from the crypto sector. A persistent question among researchers intersecting both fields is whether blockchain can become a foundational part of AI infrastructure. While many previous AI and Crypto projects focused on application layers (like AI Agents, on-chain reasoning, data markets, and compute rentals), few achieved viable commercial models. Gensyn differentiates itself by targeting the most critical and expensive layer of AI: model training. Gensyn aims to organize globally distributed GPU resources into an open AI training network. Developers can submit training tasks, nodes provide computational power, and the network verifies results while distributing incentives. The core issue addressed is not decentralization for its own sake, but the increasing centralization of compute power among tech giants. In the era of large models, access to GPUs (like the H100) has become a decisive bottleneck, dictating the pace of AI development. Major AI companies are heavily dependent on large cloud providers for compute resources. Gensyn's approach is significant for several reasons: 1) It operates at the core infrastructure layer (model training), the most resource-intensive and technically demanding part of the AI value chain. 2) It proposes a more open, collaborative model for compute, potentially increasing resource utilization by dynamically pooling idle GPUs, similar to early cloud computing logic. 3) Its technical moat lies in solving complex challenges like verifying training results, ensuring node honesty, and maintaining reliability in a distributed environment—making it more of a deep-tech infrastructure company. 4) It targets a validated, high-growth market with genuine demand, rather than pursuing blockchain integration without purpose. Ultimately, the boundaries between Crypto and AI are blurring. AI requires global resource coordination, incentive mechanisms, and collaborative systems—areas where crypto-native solutions excel. Gensyn represents a step toward making advanced training capabilities more accessible and collaborative, moving beyond a niche controlled by a few giants. If successful, it could evolve into a fundamental piece of AI infrastructure, where the most enduring value in the AI era is often created.

marsbit10 h fa

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

marsbit10 h fa

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

A US researcher's visit to China's top AI labs reveals distinct cultural and organizational factors driving China's rapid AI development. While talent, data, and compute are similar to the West, Chinese labs excel through a pragmatic, execution-focused culture: less emphasis on individual stardom and conceptual debate, and more on teamwork, engineering optimization, and mastering the full tech stack. A key advantage is the integration of young students and researchers who approach model-building with fresh perspectives and low ego, prioritizing collective progress over personal credit. This contrasts with the US culture of self-promotion and "star scientist" narratives. Chinese labs also exhibit a strong "build, don't buy" mentality, preferring to develop core capabilities—like data pipelines and environments—in-house rather than relying on external services. The ecosystem feels more collaborative than tribal, with mutual respect among labs. While government support exists, its scale is unclear, and technical decisions appear driven by labs, not state mandates. Chinese companies across sectors, from platforms to consumer tech, are building their own foundational models to control their tech destiny, reflecting a broader cultural drive for technological sovereignty. Demand for AI is emerging, with spending patterns potentially mirroring cloud infrastructure more than traditional SaaS. Despite challenges like a less mature data industry and GPU shortages, Chinese labs are propelled by vast talent, rapid iteration, and deep integration with the open-source community. The competition is evolving beyond a pure model race into a contest of organizational execution, developer ecosystems, and industrial pragmatism.

marsbit12 h fa

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

marsbit12 h fa

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

Corning, a 175-year-old glass company, is experiencing a dramatic revival as a key player in AI infrastructure, driven by surging demand for high-performance optical fiber in data centers. AI data centers require vastly more fiber than traditional ones—5 to 10 times as much per rack—to handle high-speed data transmission between GPUs. This structural demand shift, coupled with supply constraints from the lengthy expansion cycle for fiber preforms, has created a significant supply-demand gap. Nvidia has invested in Corning, along with Lumentum and Coherent, in a $4.5 billion total commitment to secure the optical supply chain for AI. Corning's competitive edge lies in its expertise in producing ultra-low-loss, high-density, and bend-resistant specialty fiber, which is critical for 800G+ and future 1.6T data rates. Its deep involvement in co-packaged optics (CPO) with partners like Nvidia further solidifies its position. While not the largest fiber manufacturer globally, Corning's revenue from enterprise/data center clients now exceeds 40% of its optical communications sales, and it has secured multi-year supply agreements with major hyperscalers including Meta and Nvidia. Financially, Corning's optical communications revenue has surged, doubling from $1.3 billion in 2023 to over $3 billion in 2025. Its stock price has risen nearly 6-fold since late 2023. Key future catalysts include the rollout of Nvidia's CPO products and the scale of undisclosed customer agreements. However, risks include high current valuations and potential disruption from next-generation technologies like hollow-core fiber. The company's long-term bet on light over electricity, maintained even through the telecom bubble crash, is now being validated by the AI boom.

marsbit12 h fa

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

marsbit12 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片