Revised CLARITY Act targets ‘non-decentralized’ DeFi operators

cointelegraphPubblicato 2026-09-12Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-09-12

Introduzione

A revised version of the CLARITY Act, proposed by Senator Cynthia Lummis, directs U.S. regulators to identify persons or groups controlling "non-decentralized finance trading protocols" and require them to comply with securities, commodities, and anti-money laundering rules. Such protocols are defined as those whose functions or rules can be materially altered by a controller, or where transactions are not governed solely by transparent code. The bill tasks the SEC and CFTC with creating activity-based rules for registration and conduct, while the Treasury would apply Bank Secrecy Act obligations. It clarifies that software itself would not need to register, and participation in security councils does not automatically establish control. Ahead of a key Senate vote requiring bipartisan support, the crypto industry expressed backing. Crypto Council for Innovation's CEO called it a pivotal moment, and Coinbase's CEO stated core issues were resolved, though negotiations on ethics and stablecoin provisions continue. Critics warn against a rushed vote before these disputes are settled. If the bill fails, agencies like the SEC may use existing authority for rulemaking.

A revised version of the CLARITY Act would direct United States regulators to determine whether people or groups controlling “non-decentralized finance trading protocols” must comply with securities, commodities and anti-money laundering (AML) requirements.

The revised text, posted on Senator Cynthia Lummis’ website, defines such a protocol as one whose functionality, operation, or rules can be materially altered by a person or coordinated group. The definition also covers protocols whose controllers can restrict users or whose transactions are not governed solely by transparent, pre-established code.

Under the proposal, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) would develop activity-based rules addressing registration, conduct, disclosure, recordkeeping and supervision. Meanwhile, the Treasury would establish how existing Bank Secrecy Act obligations apply to affected controllers.

The bill specifies that software and distributed ledger systems would not be required to register in their own capacity. It also says participation in an incident-response or security council would not, by itself, establish control over a protocol.

The revised text arrived ahead of a procedural Senate vote scheduled for Sept. 15. The measure requires 60 votes to advance, meaning Republicans will need support from Democrats despite continuing disagreements over ethics, anti-money laundering protections and stablecoin rewards.

Crypto industry backs bill as ethics dispute lingers

In a statement shared with Cointelegraph, Crypto Council for Innovation CEO Ji Hun Kim called Tuesday’s vote a “pivotal moment” for digital assets, innovation and American leadership. Kim told Cointelegraph that the US needs a framework combining consumer protections with business conduct standards.

On Thursday, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong told CNBC that the CLARITY Act was “ready to get a yes vote.” He said the “must-have issues” previously raised by Coinbase had been resolved, while negotiations over ethics restrictions remained active and appeared close to a solution. Armstrong did not specify which provisions had changed.

Related: Following Senate delay, crypto bill has narrow window to become law

Despite this, the ethics section in the newly released text remained largely unchanged from the previous version, despite being one of the main points of contention in negotiations.

On Aug. 20, Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego warned against holding a vote before lawmakers resolved disputes involving ethics and stablecoin yield. “A fast vote gets you a fast result, but I’m not sure it’s the result you want,” Gallego said at the time.

Armstrong said that if the legislation does not advance, the SEC and CFTC could instead pursue rulemaking and innovation exemptions using their existing authority.

Magazine: 10 of the greatest unsolved crypto mysteries

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the primary focus of the revised CLARITY Act regarding DeFi protocols?

AThe revised CLARITY Act directs U.S. regulators to determine whether people or groups controlling 'non-decentralized finance trading protocols' must comply with securities, commodities, and anti-money laundering (AML) requirements.

QAccording to the bill's definition, what characteristics make a protocol 'non-decentralized'?

AA protocol is considered 'non-decentralized' if its functionality, operation, or rules can be materially altered by a person or coordinated group, or if its controllers can restrict users, or if its transactions are not governed solely by transparent, pre-established code.

QWhich U.S. regulatory bodies would be responsible for rulemaking under the CLARITY Act proposal?

AThe Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) would develop activity-based rules, while the Treasury would establish how existing Bank Secrecy Act (AML) obligations apply.

QAccording to Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, what is the status of the key negotiations regarding the CLARITY Act?

ABrian Armstrong stated that the 'must-have issues' previously raised had been resolved, and while negotiations over ethics restrictions remained active, they appeared close to a solution. However, he noted the ethics section in the newly released text remained largely unchanged.

QWhat procedural challenge does the CLARITY Act face in the Senate, and what is the required vote threshold?

AThe measure requires 60 votes to advance in the Senate, meaning Republicans will need support from Democrats despite continuing disagreements over issues like ethics and anti-money laundering protections.

Letture associate

Changxin Stands Transistors Upright: A Path to Catch Up While Bypassing EUV — Will It Shake the Big Three Memory Makers?

ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) announced major progress in DRAM devices, 4F2 architecture, and hybrid bonding, briefly rattling the stocks of the three major memory makers. The key changes are the shift from the mainstream 6F2 cell architecture to 4F2, and the self-developed VSG (Vertical Surrounded Gate) transistor that enables it. In DRAM, each 1T1C cell pairs one transistor with one capacitor. Moving from 6F2 to 4F2 shrinks cell area by about one-third, allowing roughly 50% more cells in the same area—though chip-level density gains are lower (about 30–50%) because peripheral circuits do not shrink. 4F2 also relaxes design rules, reducing reliance on EUV by roughly two process generations, which matters greatly for CXMT, which cannot obtain EUV under export controls. It also eases capacitor manufacturing pressure. 4F2 is not unique to CXMT; all three major players are pursuing it. Samsung leads, targeting mass production around 2028; SK Hynix will likely adopt it one node later; Micron's plans are unclear and likely latest. CXMT says its first 4F2 product, a DDR5 RDIMM, will arrive by year-end, though volume and yield are unverified. Challenges include floating-body effects, difficult manufacturing sequences (epitaxy, backside processes, or hybrid bonding), array-periphery process decoupling, materials and resistance issues (molybdenum, ruthenium), and yield ramp. Short term (2026–2027), impact on supply-demand is limited. Medium to long term (post-2028), supply growth risks rise, potentially pressuring memory prices and the big three's profits, since conventional DDR drives most DRAM profit. CXMT gains an EUV-free catch-up path; Samsung may regain ground; SK Hynix's near-term position is safe; Micron looks relatively passive. Upstream equipment and materials suppliers may benefit.

marsbit2 h fa

Changxin Stands Transistors Upright: A Path to Catch Up While Bypassing EUV — Will It Shake the Big Three Memory Makers?

marsbit2 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片