Crypto Clarity At Standstill In Congress, Says Fed Governor On Market Structure Bill

bitcoinistPubblicato 2026-02-10Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-10

Introduzione

Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller stated that progress on the crypto market structure bill, known as the CLARITY Act, has stalled in Congress due to disagreements over key issues. The main points of contention include stablecoin yield provisions and the Fed's proposed "skinny" master accounts. Crypto advocates argue that yield-bearing stablecoins promote adoption and competition, while banking groups oppose them, warning of potential deposit outflows from traditional banks. Additionally, the White House has scheduled a meeting to address tensions between crypto firms and banks. The Fed aims to propose regulations for skinny master accounts by the fourth quarter of this year.

Federal Reserve (Fed) Governor Christopher Waller said on Monday that progress on the long‐anticipated crypto market structure legislation, commonly referred to as the CLARITY Act, appears to have stalled in Congress.

His remarks come as lawmakers remain divided over key issues, most notably stablecoin yield provisions and the Federal Reserve’s proposal for so‐called “skinny” master accounts, a topic earlier highlighted by Crypto In America.

Stablecoin Yield Fight Fuels CLARITY Act Stalemate

Waller’s comments quickly drew reaction from market observers. Crypto analyst MartyParty noted on X that the governor’s assessment reflects the ongoing deadlock surrounding the CLARITY Act.

According to MartyParty, the delay is not accidental. He argued that resistance from the banking sector has intensified, particularly around the treatment of stablecoin yields and rewards.

At the center of the dispute is whether crypto platforms such as exchanges and digital wallets should be allowed to offer interest‐like returns or incentives on stablecoins held by users.

Crypto industry advocates contend that yield‐bearing stablecoins encourage adoption, improve efficiency, and increase competition in the payments market. Banking groups, however, strongly oppose this view.

They argue that stablecoin yields pose a direct challenge to traditional bank deposits, warning that higher returns—often in the range of 3% to 5% or more, compared with near‐zero yields on many bank accounts—could trigger massive deposit outflows.

In MartyParty’s assessment, banks are concerned that passage of the CLARITY Act could move trillions of dollars onto crypto‐based payment rails, breaking what he described as the banking sector’s “closed‐loop system” and putting pressure on long‐established profit models.

Crypto And Banks Head Back To White House

Amid rising tensions, MartyParty also reported that the White House has scheduled a second meeting for Tuesday, February 10, aimed at easing friction between cryptocurrency firms and banks over stablecoin yield payments.

The meeting is expected to include senior policy officials rather than company chief executives, along with representatives from banking and crypto trade associations.

Another major point of contention is the Federal Reserve’s proposed “skinny” master account model. Under this framework, eligible fintech and crypto firms would be granted limited access to the Fed’s payment systems without receiving full banking privileges.

The debate around skinny accounts became especially clear through 44 comment letters submitted to the Federal Reserve. Crypto firms and industry groups generally expressed support, while banking organizations responded with caution or outright opposition.

Banking groups raised concerns about oversight and risk. The American Bankers Association (ABA) warned that many entities likely to qualify for payment accounts lack a long‐term supervisory track record and are not subject to consistent federal safety standards.

Governor Waller indicated that he hopes the Federal Reserve will be able to publish proposed regulations for skinny master accounts in the fourth quarter of this year.

The daily chart shows the total crypto market cap at $2.35 trillion as of Monday. Source: TOTAL on TradingView.com

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main reason for the stalled progress of the CLARITY Act in Congress, according to the article?

AThe main reason is the ongoing deadlock over key issues, particularly the dispute around stablecoin yield provisions and the Federal Reserve's proposal for 'skinny' master accounts.

QWhy do banking groups oppose the idea of stablecoin yields?

ABanking groups argue that stablecoin yields pose a direct challenge to traditional bank deposits, as higher returns (often 3% to 5% or more) compared to near-zero yields on many bank accounts could trigger massive deposit outflows and threaten their established profit models.

QWhat is the purpose of the White House meeting scheduled for February 10th?

AThe White House meeting aims to ease friction between cryptocurrency firms and banks over the contentious issue of stablecoin yield payments.

QWhat is the Federal Reserve's proposed 'skinny' master account model?

AThe 'skinny' master account model is a framework where eligible fintech and crypto firms would be granted limited access to the Fed’s payment systems without receiving full banking privileges.

QWhat was a key concern raised by the American Bankers Association (ABA) regarding the 'skinny' master accounts?

AThe ABA warned that many entities likely to qualify for these payment accounts lack a long-term supervisory track record and are not subject to consistent federal safety standards, raising concerns about oversight and risk.

Letture associate

Annual Salary of Millions Competing for Electricians, Meta Rushes to Open Its Own Technical School

The AI boom is facing an unexpected bottleneck: a severe shortage of skilled construction workers and electricians. As tech giants like Meta, OpenAI, and Alphabet race to build massive data centers—such as OpenAI's $16 billion "Stargate" project—they are hitting a critical labor wall. The U.S. needs an estimated 130,000 more electricians, 240,000 construction workers, and 150,000 supervisors by 2030 for AI infrastructure alone, but tens of thousands of electrician jobs go unfilled each year. While AI companies offer high premiums, with electricians earning up to $280,000 annually, worker scarcity still causes massive losses—delays on a single project can cost $14.2 million per month. The complexity of building AI data centers, which require immense power (equivalent to powering hundreds of thousands of homes), sophisticated electrical systems, and advanced liquid cooling solutions, demands highly skilled technicians who are in short supply. To combat this, companies are investing heavily in training. Meta has committed $115 million to a free training school offering tuition, housing, and stipends, targeting 5,000 new workers. OpenAI is partnering with unions to secure skilled labor. These efforts are paying off, with a significant rise in Gen Z interest in trade schools over college. However, the power demands are staggering. AI data centers are driving a rapid surge in electricity consumption, projected to account for up to 12% of U.S. power use by 2028 and raising costs for consumers. Furthermore, the construction boom is project-based, leading to a potential future glut of trained workers once building peaks, which could depress wages industry-wide. The race for AI supremacy now depends as much on skilled hands as on advanced chips.

marsbit1 h fa

Annual Salary of Millions Competing for Electricians, Meta Rushes to Open Its Own Technical School

marsbit1 h fa

OpenAI No Longer Sells Its Most Expensive Model for Profit

OpenAI is shifting its business strategy away from promoting its most expensive, flagship models for every task. Recent price cuts—80% for GPT-5.6 Luna and 20% for Terra—signal a deeper change: the company now actively advises users that many tasks don't require the most powerful model. Instead, OpenAI recommends a tiered approach: use the high-end GPT-5.6 Sol for complex planning and analysis, then delegate execution to cheaper models like Luna. This mirrors moves by Anthropic, which recently launched Claude Opus 5 at half the price of its top model, Fable 5. Both companies are de-emphasizing flagship models as primary revenue drivers, using them instead for brand prestige and technological showcases. The industry is entering a "mass-market" phase, similar to automotive, where high-volume, cost-effective models handle daily operations and drive scale. OpenAI's price reductions are partly enabled by AI models themselves optimizing underlying code and infrastructure, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of efficiency gains and cost reduction. Competition is shifting from "who is smartest" to "who offers the best value." The goal is no longer selling individual models but fostering widespread API adoption and ecosystem lock-in. By making AI calls cheap and ubiquitous, companies like OpenAI aim to become the indispensable, utility-like infrastructure powering automated workflows—the "water and electricity" of software, quietly embedded everywhere.

marsbit1 h fa

OpenAI No Longer Sells Its Most Expensive Model for Profit

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片