Coinbase Executive Backs CLARITY Act Delay Amid Crypto Frustration

TheNewsCryptoPubblicato 2026-01-03Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-01-03

Introduzione

Coinbase executive John D'Agostino supports the CLARITY Act's delay, emphasizing that the comprehensive market structure legislation requires careful consideration due to its foundational role in regulating digital assets. Unlike the simpler GENIUS Act passed earlier, the CLARITY Act involves defining jurisdictional boundaries, compliance standards, and oversight across multiple regulators, which takes time but is crucial for long-term industry growth. Despite causing frustration and contributing to capital outflows, the delay is seen as necessary to avoid future regulatory confusion. The White House has signaled potential progress in January, aiming to curb talent migration and provide clarity. While the act may not immediately impact markets like Bitcoin's price, its proper implementation is prioritized over haste, with potential to reshape U.S. digital asset operations for decades.

The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, widely known as the CLARITY Act, continues to test the patience of the US crypto industry. However, a senior executive at Coinbase says the delay is both expected and necessary, given the scope of what the legislation aims to achieve.

Speaking on CNBC on Friday, Coinbase’s institutional head of strategy John D’Agostino said he fully understands why the bill has not yet crossed the finish line.

“I completely understand why this is taking longer,” D’Agostino said. “It’s the kind of bill that is more foundational for the growth of crypto or any real asset class.” He added that lawmakers need time because the CLARITY Act addresses the structural core of how digital asset markets should operate in the United States.

CLARITY Act faces deeper complexity than GENIUS Act

D’Agostino contrasted the CLARITY Act with the recently passed GENIUS Act, which became law in July. While he described the GENIUS Act as transformative, he said it focused on issues that were structurally simpler.

According to him, market structure legislation requires lawmakers to define jurisdictional boundaries, compliance standards, and oversight responsibilities across multiple regulators. These factors naturally slow progress but also increase the long-term value of the outcome.

As a result, Coinbase believes patience now could prevent regulatory confusion later, especially as crypto markets grow and intersect more deeply with traditional finance.

White House signals progress in January

Optimism around the bill has not disappeared. Just weeks ago, White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks said lawmakers were close to advancing the CLARITY Act early next year.

“We are closer than ever to passing the landmark crypto market structure legislation,” Sacks said on Dec. 19, adding that the administration plans to “finish the job in January.”

Supporters argue that the bill could reduce uncertainty that has driven talent and capital overseas. D’Agostino echoed these sentiments and pointed out that the “massive talent migration” away from the US crypto sector is contributing to the pressure to legislative action.

Market impact and industry reaction

Nevertheless, despite these assurances, delays had impacted market sentiment. Asset manager CoinShares recently linked nearly $952 million in weekly outflows from crypto investment products to prolonged regulatory uncertainty tied to the CLARITY Act.

However, not everyone expects the legislation to move markets immediately. Veteran trader Peter Brandt said the bill, while important, may not significantly affect Bitcoin’s price in the short term.

“Is it world-shaking? No,” Brandt added. “It’s necessary but not value-definiting.”

Looking ahead

Coinbase, as well as most of the crypto industry, is focused on getting the right framework rather than hastened regulation. Even as frustration mounts, it seems CEOs place greater emphasis on having the right framework in place.

If Congress delivers clarity in 2026, the CLARITY Act could reshape how digital assets operate in the US for decades, even if the wait proves difficult in the near term.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Can Dogecoin Sustain Its Recovery Above $0.135?

Domande pertinenti

QWhy does Coinbase executive John D'Agostino believe the delay of the CLARITY Act is necessary?

AHe believes the delay is necessary because the CLARITY Act is a foundational bill that addresses the structural core of how digital asset markets should operate, requiring lawmakers to define jurisdictional boundaries, compliance standards, and oversight responsibilities across multiple regulators, which naturally takes more time.

QHow does the CLARITY Act differ from the recently passed GENIUS Act according to the article?

AThe CLARITY Act addresses more complex structural issues like market jurisdiction and regulatory oversight, while the GENIUS Act, though transformative, focused on structurally simpler issues.

QWhat did White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks say about the progress of the CLARITY Act?

ADavid Sacks stated that lawmakers were closer than ever to passing the landmark crypto market structure legislation and that the administration plans to 'finish the job in January'.

QWhat market reaction has been linked to the delays in the CLARITY Act's passage?

AAsset manager CoinShares linked nearly $952 million in weekly outflows from crypto investment products to the prolonged regulatory uncertainty caused by the delay of the CLARITY Act.

QWhat is the long-term potential impact of the CLARITY Act if passed, according to the article?

AIf passed, the CLARITY Act could reshape how digital assets operate in the US for decades by providing a clear regulatory framework, reducing uncertainty, and preventing future regulatory confusion.

Letture associate

It was revealed that 92.7% of institutional bitcoin (BTC) reserves are held by companies based in the USA

Institutional Bitcoin reserves held by publicly traded companies are overwhelmingly concentrated in the US, according to data from Unfolded. US-based firms hold 1.24 million BTC, accounting for a staggering 92.7% of the global total held by such entities. Over the past 12 months, these companies added 510,000 BTC to their portfolios, a purchasing rate that vastly outpaced new supply. Their acquisitions were more than triple the number of new BTC mined during the same period, significantly impacting the asset's supply dynamics. This trend, heavily influenced by firms like MicroStrategy, reflects a growing institutional adoption of Bitcoin as a long-term reserve asset across sectors like energy, technology, and finance. Analysts warn this sustained institutional demand, especially after the upcoming halving which will reduce new supply, could further strain the supply-demand balance and influence long-term price trends.

cryptonews.ruAdesso

It was revealed that 92.7% of institutional bitcoin (BTC) reserves are held by companies based in the USA

cryptonews.ruAdesso

Bank of Japan Signals Interest Rate Hike Despite Keeping Them at 1%

The Bank of Japan (BOJ) kept its benchmark interest rate at 1% on July 31, as widely expected, following a June hike to a 31-year high. The decision passed with an 8-1 vote, with board member Hajime Takata again dissenting in favor of a hike to 1.25%. Despite holding rates steady, the BOJ signaled a hawkish tilt, warning that underlying inflation is likely to accelerate and exceed 2% from the latter half of the fiscal year. While it slightly lowered its core inflation forecast for FY2026, officials expressed stronger confidence that an overshoot will occur later, driven by yen weakness, corporate pricing behavior, and lingering energy shock effects. Markets were focused on the BOJ's forward guidance. Analysts noted the central bank appeared to balance short-term caution with a long-term warning of tighter policy. Governor Kazuo Ueda faces the challenge of reconciling a government reluctant to tighten further with bond markets already pricing in additional hikes, with the timing of the next move debated. Adding complexity, the BOJ reportedly intervened in currency markets hours before the rate decision, buying yen to support the currency which had fallen to 40-year lows against the dollar. Yen weakness stems from the wide U.S.-Japan interest rate gap, high fuel prices, and market skepticism about the pace of BOJ policy normalization. The yield on Japan's 10-year government bonds fell to 2.8%, indicating investor expectations for future monetary tightening.

cryptonews.ruAdesso

Bank of Japan Signals Interest Rate Hike Despite Keeping Them at 1%

cryptonews.ruAdesso

Reddit Triples Profit to $253 Million, But Notes Search Query Volatility

Reddit reported second-quarter 2026 net income of $253 million, roughly triple the $89 million from a year earlier. Revenue surged 61% year-over-year to $805 million, marking the eighth consecutive quarter of over 60% growth. Advertising revenue jumped 64% to $762 million, driven by higher ad prices and increased impressions. The company's weekly active unique users surpassed 500 million for the first time, reaching 514.6 million. However, executives flagged a concern: traffic from search engines became volatile toward the end of the quarter, creating headwinds for converting its large audience into daily users. CEO Steven Huffman noted that "AI overviews have not yet had a similarly positive impact" on search referrals compared to traditional links. Other highlights include adjusted EBITDA rising 43% to $343 million, operating cash flow of $262 million for the quarter, and the launch of Reddit's first shareholder return program with $235 million spent on share repurchases. For the current quarter, Reddit forecasts revenue between $860 million and $870 million.

cryptonews.ru2 min fa

Reddit Triples Profit to $253 Million, But Notes Search Query Volatility

cryptonews.ru2 min fa

Why Are Leveraged ETFs like 7709 Inherently Negative EV Products?

This article argues that the SK H力士 2x Leveraged ETF (7709) is fundamentally a negative expected value (EV) product, rather than simply a "double SK H力士" investment. Its core issue stems from its daily rebalancing mechanism to maintain a 2x leverage target. After a price move, the fund must buy more after a rise or sell after a fall to readjust its leverage, creating a systematic pattern of buying high and selling low. This introduces a "delay loss": it always reacts to past price changes, missing potential gains from adjusting earlier during an uptrend and suffering greater losses from adjusting later during a downtrend. While more frequent intraday rebalancing would improve returns in strong, smooth trending markets by reinvesting profits or cutting losses sooner, it also dramatically increases volatility drag (frictional losses) during choppy, oscillating markets due to more frequent high-buy/low-sell trades. The author draws a parallel to an option seller who delta hedges (short gamma), which involves similar "buy high, sell low" dynamic hedging. However, unlike an option seller who receives upfront premium (IV and theta) as compensation for this risk, the leveraged ETF investor receives no such compensation. Instead, they bear all the path-dependent volatility decay, plus additional costs like swap/derivatives financing, management fees, and trading slippage. Thus, the product's return profile can be framed as: 2x directional return minus realized variance drag minus financing costs minus derivatives costs minus management fees minus transaction costs. For the investor to profit, SK H力士's price must not only rise significantly but do so in a strong, sustained, and smooth trend to overcome these inherent structural costs. High volatility and frequent price reversals are particularly damaging. The article also notes that while the ETF has no explicit liquidation line like perpetual futures, avoiding a sudden "blow-up," its net asset value can still decay towards zero over time through this combination of volatility drag and fees. For experienced traders, directly managing leverage via perpetual contracts may offer more control and potentially lower costs than this packaged, mechanistic product.

marsbit7 min fa

Why Are Leveraged ETFs like 7709 Inherently Negative EV Products?

marsbit7 min fa

'Backstabbing' or 'Win-Win'? How Likely Is TradeXYZ to Break Away from Hyperliquid and Go Solo?

The article discusses the growing debate over whether TradeXYZ, which dominates Hyperliquid's HIP-3 market with over 90% of its volume, might break away to build its own independent trading platform. This possibility is fueled by TradeXYZ's immense market influence and the common industry trend of successful projects seeking more control and profit capture. Key arguments for a potential split include TradeXYZ's overwhelming contribution to Hyperliquid's metrics and the financial incentive to retain all transaction fees, as it currently splits them 50/50 with Hyperliquid. The piece draws parallels to other cases, like Anthropic's "Claude Code" competing with its former partner Cursor, suggesting "betrayal" can occur when business leverage shifts. However, strong counterarguments suggest a split is unlikely or would be detrimental. TradeXYZ relies on Hyperliquid's high-performance infrastructure and its platform as a primary user acquisition channel. Building a comparable system would be challenging. Furthermore, the founders of both projects share a history of trust and mutual admiration. The analysis concludes that a separation would likely be a lose-lose scenario: Hyperliquid would lose a major growth narrative and trading volume, while TradeXYZ would face technical hurdles, user migration issues, and reputational damage, potentially allowing competitors to seize market share. The most rational path is seen as continued collaboration, with TradeXYZ potentially negotiating better terms while leveraging Hyperliquid's established strengths.

marsbit17 min fa

'Backstabbing' or 'Win-Win'? How Likely Is TradeXYZ to Break Away from Hyperliquid and Go Solo?

marsbit17 min fa

Trading

Spot