U.S., U.K. unveil stablecoin roadmap as CLARITY Act stalls: ‘For their own political gain!’

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-07-15Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-07-15

Introduzione

The U.S. and U.K. have jointly affirmed their commitment to fostering innovation in digital assets by outlining a cooperative roadmap for stablecoins and tokenized assets. Their 10-point statement emphasizes reducing regulatory friction, particularly by avoiding disproportionately burdensome reserve requirements for stablecoin issuers. This follows the Bank of England's softened stance on reserve rules, now more aligned with the U.S. GENIUS Act framework. However, a divergence in regulatory progress is emerging. The U.K. is advancing towards a comprehensive crypto regulatory framework set for 2027, which includes measures like deferring capital gains tax on crypto lending. In contrast, the U.S. faces significant political hurdles, with the key crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act, stalled and its chances of passage dropping to yearly lows. This political deadlock, marked by anti-tech rhetoric, risks leaving the U.S. behind in establishing a clear and frictionless framework for digital assets.

The U.S. and U.K. have reaffirmed their commitment to reducing regulatory friction for digital assets and the modernization of capital markets.

In a joint statement issued on the 14th of July, the two governments shared a 10-point view on stablecoins and tokenized assets, with innovation as the anchor pillar.

The UK and United States affirm that stablecoins are an important vehicle for innovation in digital money. The UK and United States intend to enable the use of stablecoins in cross-border finance.

AD

Some of the issues addressed include reserves, liquidity, and prudential requirements for stablecoin issuers to operate across the two markets.

In particular, the countries pledged to avoid ‘imposing burdensome’ reserve requirements for stablecoins.

Neither government intends to impose burdensome reserve requirements that are disproportionate to risk and that create unwarranted barriers to entry.

The above stance is noteworthy given the recent U.K. softer stance on stablecoin reserves. Initially, it pushed for a strict plan where only 60% of reserves would earn interest, while 40% would be non-yielding at the central bank. The industry pushed against this and called it anti-competitive.

In response, the Bank of England softened the proposal, allowing up to 70% in yield-bearing bonds and reducing cash requirements to 30%. This somewhat mirrored the U.S. GENIUS Act framework, which mandates reserves to be backed by highly liquid assets like U.S. Treasury bonds.

Additionally, it scrapped its caps on individual stablecoin holdings to match the U.S. open market. Still, the two countries have divergences on some aspects of crypto regulation.

The U.S.’s CLARITY Act stalls as the U.K. eyes clear rules by 2027

First, the U.K. will defer capital gains tax for crypto lending to avoid burden and double taxation. The rules will be live in 2027, alongside its broader crypto regulatory framework covering stablecoins, exchanges, staking, and market abuse, among others.

However, a similar U.S. crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act, has stalled and risks being deferred to the 2030s. With ethics provisions becoming a sticky issue, odds of CLARITY Act passage dropped to a record yearly low of 32% before briefly hitting 38%.

The bill has now become a political issue with increasing anti-tech rhetoric between Republicans and Democrats, according to Miles Jennings, legal chief at a16z VC firm.

Source: X

The U.S. and the U.K. are pushing for a frictionless stablecoin and tokenization framework. But the U.S. risks falling behind amid uncertainty around the CLARITY Act.


Final Summary

  • The U.S. and U.K. vowed to reduce friction for stablecoin usage as part of driving innovation in capital markets.
  • But the U.S. could fall behind as CLARITY Act passage expectations have fallen to record lows.

Crypto di tendenza

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main topic announced by the U.S. and U.K. in their joint statement?

AThe U.S. and U.K. reaffirmed their commitment to reducing regulatory friction for digital assets and the modernization of capital markets. They shared a 10-point view focused on enabling stablecoins and tokenized assets, with innovation as a key pillar, and intend to allow the use of stablecoins in cross-border finance.

QWhat specific regulatory issue regarding stablecoin reserves did the U.S. and U.K. address?

ABoth governments pledged to avoid imposing burdensome reserve requirements that are disproportionate to risk and create unwarranted barriers to entry. This stance follows the U.K.'s softened position on reserves, moving from a stricter plan to allowing up to 70% in yield-bearing bonds and reducing cash requirements to 30%.

QHow does the progress of crypto regulation in the U.K. compare to that in the U.S., according to the article?

AThe U.K. is moving forward with clear crypto rules, including deferring capital gains tax for crypto lending, set to be live by 2027. In contrast, the U.S.'s key crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act, has stalled, with passage expectations dropping to as low as 32%, risking delay into the 2030s due to political issues.

QWhat is the CLARITY Act and why has it become a contentious issue in the U.S.?

AThe CLARITY Act is a U.S. crypto market structure bill that has stalled in Congress. It has become a political issue with increasing anti-tech rhetoric between Republicans and Democrats. According to Miles Jennings of a16z, ethics provisions have become a sticky point, causing the odds of its passage to drop significantly.

QWhat is the potential consequence for the U.S. if the CLARITY Act continues to stall?

AIf the CLARITY Act continues to stall, the U.S. risks falling behind in establishing a clear regulatory framework for stablecoins and tokenized assets, while the U.K. moves forward with its plans. This could impact innovation and the U.S.'s competitive position in the digital asset space.

Letture associate

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

In a landscape dominated by power and profit motives, the author argues that decentralization is not merely one desirable feature among many in blockchain design—it is the singular, non-negotiable defense against corporate and capital capture. The article adopts a Machiavellian, realist perspective on human institutions, positing that businesses will inevitably attempt to co-opt any valuable network to protect their profits and dominance. While external attacks like 51% forks are often discussed, the greater existential risk is internal capture—the gradual erosion of a protocol’s neutrality by vested interests, as seen historically with platforms like Visa and Google. The piece critiques permissioned chains, highly centralized “permissionless” layer-1s, and layer-2s without sufficient decentralization (e.g., single sequencers) as inherently vulnerable. These compromised systems, promoted by established financial players, are framed as delaying tactics to stifle truly open networks that threaten existing high-fee, inefficient business models. Real-world examples, such as closed enterprise consortiums that exclude competitors, illustrate how such systems cement oligopolies rather than foster innovation. The author concludes that while decentralized protocols like Ethereum are imperfect and costly to operate, they represent the only viable long-term equilibrium. In a market where value naturally flows to the most secure and neutral settlement layer, only maximally decentralized public blockchains can resist being subsumed by capital and powerful incumbents.

Foresight News6 min fa

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

Foresight News6 min fa

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Bitcoin's governance is once again at the center of a heated debate, this time ignited by BIP-110, the "Reduced Data Temporary Softfork." This proposal aims to curb non-monetary data (like inscriptions and Runes) by introducing seven new consensus-layer restrictions over a year, such as limiting new output scripts to 34 bytes and restoring the OP_RETURN cap to 83 bytes. The controversy stems from BIP-110's fundamental shift: it moves the battle against "spam" from node relay and miner policies to the consensus layer, rendering currently valid transactions invalid. Supporters, arguing that default policy governance has failed (highlighted by Bitcoin Core v30's relaxation of OP_RETURN limits), see this as necessary to protect node resources and Bitcoin's monetary focus. Opponents, led by figures like Michael Saylor and Adam Back, warn it dangerously centralizes governance. Saylor listed 110 reasons against it, criticizing its low 55% miner activation threshold and potential for chain splits. Back emphasized Bitcoin's "permissionless" ethos, arguing no single group should impose value judgments via consensus rules. Further complicating matters, technical critiques suggest BIP-110 may be technically circumventable, and a "BlockSlop" vulnerability in its upgrade path poses a consensus risk. The debate has drawn in diverse stakeholders: miners (with pools like Ocean signaling support and Foundry polling clients), node operators (like Bitcoin Knots), and new players like corporate treasury holder MicroStrategy (Saylor), whose market influence adds a novel dimension. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a governance stress test, exposing the unresolved question: who decides Bitcoin's rules? It pits the authority of miners, node operators, developers, and capital holders against each other, with each side claiming to defend Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and security.

marsbit23 min fa

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

marsbit23 min fa

Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Title: Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate A new technical proposal, BIP-110 (Reduced Data Temporary Softfork), has sparked a fundamental governance debate within the Bitcoin community. It aims to impose new consensus rules for one year to limit non-financial data (like inscriptions and Runes) on-chain, moving beyond simple node and miner policy filters to invalidate currently valid transactions. Supporters argue that default policies have failed due to workarounds, necessitating consensus-layer changes to protect Bitcoin's core monetary function from data spam. Critics, including Michael Saylor and Adam Back, contend this dangerously centralizes judgment, undermines permissionlessness, and sets a risky governance precedent. They advocate for market-based solutions like fees or Layer 2s instead. The debate exposes deeper tensions: miners are divided on activation; node operators assert their sovereignty; Bitcoin Core developers influence defaults without direct accountability; and large corporate holders like MicroStrategy now wield narrative influence. Technically, BIP-110 may not fully block data and carries a disclosed consensus bug risk. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a stress test, forcing the community to confront the unresolved question: who legitimately decides what Bitcoin is and how it evolves, amidst competing claims from miners, nodes, developers, and capital holders.

链捕手35 min fa

Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

链捕手35 min fa

Zcash's New Node Zakura Goes Live: Privacy Payments Can Reach 50,000 TPS, Aiming to Rival Visa and Mastercard

Zcash, a privacy-focused cryptocurrency, has launched a new full node software called Zakura version 1.0.0. Developed by Zcash co-founder Sean Bowe and Dev Ojha, with private ZEC donations, its goal is to enable Zcash to process over 50,000 transactions per second (TPS)—matching the scale of Visa and Mastercard—while maintaining full transaction privacy and verifiability. This addresses a key bottleneck, as Zcash currently handles only about 1 private transaction per second. Zakura is a fork of the Zcash Foundation's Zebra node. It features chain pruning and snapshots, reducing disk usage and allowing new nodes to sync in under two minutes. It also offers compatibility with the legacy `zcashd` client interface. The scalability challenge stems from the large data size of privacy proofs. Bowe's Tachyon project aims to use recursive proofs to reduce consensus-layer data needs from ~500 MB/s to ~100 MB/s. For wallet scalability, Valar Group is researching Private Information Retrieval (PIR) tech to allow wallets to fetch their data privately. Zakura supports fast block propagation and the upcoming "Ironwood" network upgrade (NU6.3), scheduled for activation around July 28th. Ironwood was created to contain a critical inflation bug discovered in the Orchard shielded pool in May 2024. The fix uses "turnstiles" to trap any counterfeit ZEC created during the vulnerability period within the shielded pool, preventing it from entering circulation and restoring supply integrity.

marsbit50 min fa

Zcash's New Node Zakura Goes Live: Privacy Payments Can Reach 50,000 TPS, Aiming to Rival Visa and Mastercard

marsbit50 min fa

Trading

Spot

Articoli Popolari

Come comprare GAIN

Benvenuto in HTX.com! Abbiamo reso l'acquisto di GriffinAI (GAIN) semplice e conveniente. Segui la nostra guida passo passo per intraprendere il tuo viaggio nel mondo delle criptovalute.Step 1: Crea il tuo Account HTXUsa la tua email o numero di telefono per registrarti il tuo account gratuito su HTX. Vivi un'esperienza facile e sblocca tutte le funzionalità,Crea il mio accountStep 2: Vai in Acquista crypto e seleziona il tuo metodo di pagamentoCarta di credito/debito: utilizza la tua Visa o Mastercard per acquistare immediatamente GriffinAIGAIN.Bilancio: Usa i fondi dal bilancio del tuo account HTX per fare trading senza problemi.Terze parti: abbiamo aggiunto metodi di pagamento molto utilizzati come Google Pay e Apple Pay per maggiore comodità.P2P: Fai trading direttamente con altri utenti HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): Offriamo servizi su misura e tassi di cambio competitivi per i trader.Step 3: Conserva GriffinAI (GAIN)Dopo aver acquistato GriffinAI (GAIN), conserva nel tuo account HTX. In alternativa, puoi inviare tramite trasferimento blockchain o scambiare per altre criptovalute.Step 4: Scambia GriffinAI (GAIN)Scambia facilmente GriffinAI (GAIN) nel mercato spot di HTX. Accedi al tuo account, seleziona la tua coppia di trading, esegui le tue operazioni e monitora in tempo reale. Offriamo un'esperienza user-friendly sia per chi ha appena iniziato che per i trader più esperti.

346 Totale visualizzazioniPubblicato il 2025.09.24Aggiornato il 2026.06.02

Come comprare GAIN

Discussioni

Benvenuto nella Community HTX. Qui puoi rimanere informato sugli ultimi sviluppi della piattaforma e accedere ad approfondimenti esperti sul mercato. Le opinioni degli utenti sul prezzo di GAIN GAIN sono presentate come di seguito.

活动图片