‘Too many issues’- Coinbase CEO withdraws support for CLARITY Act

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-01-15Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-01-15

Introduzione

Coinbase has withdrawn its support for the CLARITY Act, a crypto market structure bill, leading the Senate Banking Committee to postpone its markup. CEO Brian Armstrong stated the current version has "too many issues" and is "bad for the sector," preferring no bill over a bad one. Key objections include bans on tokenized equities, stablecoin rewards, and privacy-limiting DeFi restrictions. In response, Chairman Tim Scott delayed the session to allow further bipartisan negotiations. The market's odds of the bill passing this year fell to 52%, down from 80%, reflecting increased uncertainty. Senator Elizabeth Warren also proposed 35 stricter amendments, seen as favorable to traditional banks.

Coinbase has withdrawn its support for the crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act, forcing the Senate Banking Committee to postpone the planned markup.

In a statement, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said the draft, which was scheduled for markup, had “too many issues” and was “bad” for the sector.

He highlighted the ban on tokenized equities, stablecoin rewards, and the prohibition of DeFi that would limit privacy as key deal breakers.

“This version (draft) would be materially worse than the current status quo. We’d rather have no bill than a bad bill. Hopefully, we can all get to a better draft.”

He added that crypto needs to be treated on a “level playing field with the rest of financial services.”

Senate Banking Committee postpones markup

Coinbase’s move reportedly derailed the markup scheduled for the 15th of January. In response, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) postponed the session to allow bipartisan negotiations to continue.

Scott added,

“I’ve spoken with leaders across the crypto industry, the financial sector, and my Democratic and Republican colleagues, and everyone remains at the table working in good faith.”

However, unlike the Senate Agriculture Committee, which also pushed its markup timeline to the last week of January, the Banking Committee didn’t share a new schedule as of press time.

Whether the Banking committee will align with the Agriculture’s schedule was unclear.

Meanwhile, Galaxy Head of Research Alex Thorn noted that Senator Elizabeth Warren filed 35 amendments to the crypto bill. These include stricter DeFi oversight and a proposed ban on tokenized stocks.

Taken together, the changes were largely viewed as a win for the banks, who had successfully pushed for limiting stablecoin rewards in the draft.

Market is 50/50 on the CLARITY Act

These last-minute amendments further diluted the bill, according to crypto supporters. And with the temporary pause on the bill momentum, the market was nearly 50/50 on the chance of it being passed into law this year.

At the time of writing, Polymarket showed a 52% chance of the bill becoming law.

That figure was down from nearly 80% just two days earlier. It reflects growing uncertainty, especially if unresolved issues spill into the U.S. election cycle.


Final Thoughts

  • The Senate Banking Committee has joined its Agriculture colleagues in postponing the markup of the crypto market structure bill.
  • Coinbase CEO said the industry would “rather have no bill than a bad bill.”

Domande pertinenti

QWhy did Coinbase withdraw its support for the CLARITY Act?

ACoinbase CEO Brian Armstrong stated the draft had 'too many issues' and was 'bad' for the crypto sector, citing the ban on tokenized equities, stablecoin rewards, and the prohibition of DeFi that would limit privacy as key deal breakers.

QWhat was the immediate consequence of Coinbase's withdrawal of support?

AThe Senate Banking Committee postponed the planned markup session for the CLARITY Act that was scheduled for January 15th.

QAccording to the article, who is seen as the main beneficiary of the recent amendments to the bill?

AThe changes were largely viewed as a win for the banks, who had successfully pushed for limiting stablecoin rewards in the draft.

QWhat did Senator Elizabeth Warren propose in her amendments to the crypto bill?

ASenator Elizabeth Warren filed 35 amendments, which included stricter DeFi oversight and a proposed ban on tokenized stocks.

QWhat does the current market prediction (on Polymarket) indicate about the bill's chance of becoming law?

AAt the time of writing, Polymarket showed a 52% chance of the bill becoming law, down from nearly 80% just two days earlier, reflecting growing uncertainty.

Letture associate

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手9 h fa

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手9 h fa

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit11 h fa

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit11 h fa

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手12 h fa

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手12 h fa

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit13 h fa

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit13 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片