Why Wall Street says ‘no bill is better than a bad U.S. crypto bill’

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-01-16Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-01-16

Introduzione

Industry players strongly oppose the recently proposed U.S. crypto market structure bill, arguing it fails to provide adequate regulatory clarity. While the legislation aims to classify digital assets and define regulatory roles, key figures like Bitwise CEO Hunter Horsley and Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong criticize specific provisions—such as restrictions on asset tokenization and stablecoin rewards—as counterproductive. Armstrong notably stated, “no bill is better than a bad bill,” emphasizing that overly restrictive rules could limit competition and exclude Americans from emerging financial opportunities. Despite ongoing negotiations, concerns over consumer protection, pension risks, and rising crypto-related fraud continue to drive opposition. The industry seeks clearer guidelines, especially for DeFi and institutional involvement, but believes innovation will continue regardless of the bill’s outcome.

Industry players have pushed back strongly against the recently released draft of the crypto market structure bill, which lawmakers scheduled for a vote earlier this week.

Although the bill aims to deliver long-awaited regulatory clarity, it has failed to win broad support across the sector.

The legislation aims to define how digital assets are classified and clarify the roles of regulatory agencies in overseeing the space. It also seeks to outline which products and services crypto companies can legally offer, while prioritizing consumer protection for U.S. citizens.

The industry has reacted far more critically to this bill than to earlier crypto legislation, such as the GENIUS Act, which established a stablecoin framework and won broad support.

Why the pushback?

Hunter Horsley, CEO of Bitwise Asset Management, said regulators have made progress in supporting the crypto industry, but they still leave major clarity gaps.

Speaking to CNBC, Horsley highlighted concerns about the bill. He pointed out that certain provisions, such as restrictions on asset tokenization and the ban on stablecoin rewards, pose significant challenges.

He added that there is strong interest from large institutions, including Bitwise clients, banks, wealth management firms, and hedge funds, all of whom need clearer regulatory language around DeFi.

“There are a lot of firms that want to tokenize securities, equities... some of the world’s largest asset managers. They want, if possible, to know clearly what the rules of the road are.”

Horsley emphasized that the situation is no longer driven solely by the crypto industry. Traditional financial institutions are now actively looking to bring their clients into the ecosystem, a shift he believes may be influencing the structure and direction of the current bill.

“I don’t think it’s coming from a place of attempting to be counterproductive. I think the reality is that these are complex issues, and there’s a lot of voices.”

He concluded by stressing that the outcome of this bill is not a “make or break” moment for crypto, adding that innovation in the space will continue regardless.

Coinbase CEO also pushes back

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has echoed similar concerns, stating that “no bill is better than a bad bill,” as the company withdrew its support for the current version of the legislation.

Armstrong acknowledged that while some elements of the bill do not fully align with the interests of American consumers, Coinbase remains open to engaging with lawmakers to find a workable path forward, according to his CNBC interview.

He argued that banks must not use legislation to limit competition or “put their thumb on the scale,” warning that this approach would exclude Americans from emerging financial opportunities.

To illustrate his point, Armstrong highlighted how stablecoin rewards could offer users yields of up to 3.8%, compared to an average of 0.14% (or 14 basis points) from traditional banks on dollar deposits. He also noted that stablecoins are typically backed by reserves such as U.S. Treasury bills, while banks operate on a fractional reserve basis.

Despite the disagreements, negotiations remain active. Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott confirmed that discussions are ongoing, stating that “everyone is at the table working in good faith.”

Pushback and hurdles

Opposition to the bill has been building for months, as various stakeholders seek to protect their interests.

In December 2025, AMBCrypto reported that the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) urged the Senate to reconsider the legislation, warning that it could place “profound risk” on workers’ pensions due to the volatility associated with crypto assets.

Concerns over fraud have also intensified. Crypto-related scams have surged, with an estimated $14 billion lost to fraud in 2025 alone, according to blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis.

Market sentiment has reflected these concerns. The broader crypto market has experienced volatility over the past day, with the total market capitalization standing at approximately $3.23 trillion.


Final Thoughts

  • Bitwise CEO calls for greater clarity around how the bill addresses DeFi and asset tokenization.
  • Industry players push back on the legislation, although negotiations remain ongoing as all parties stay engaged in discussions.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main reason Wall Street and crypto industry players are saying 'no bill is better than a bad bill'?

AThey believe the current draft of the crypto market structure bill contains problematic provisions, such as restrictions on asset tokenization and a ban on stablecoin rewards, which could stifle innovation and limit financial opportunities for Americans, making it a 'bad bill'.

QAccording to Bitwise CEO Hunter Horsley, what is a key concern for large institutions regarding the proposed crypto bill?

ALarge institutions, including banks and asset managers, need clearer regulatory language specifically around DeFi (Decentralized Finance) and the rules for tokenizing securities and equities.

QWhat specific financial comparison did Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong make to argue against the bill's restrictions?

AArmstrong compared the potential 3.8% yield from stablecoin rewards to the average 0.14% yield offered by traditional banks on dollar deposits, highlighting the better returns consumers could get with stablecoins, which are often backed by safer reserves like U.S. Treasury bills.

QWhat are some of the major risks cited by opponents of the bill, such as the American Federation of Teachers?

AOpponents warn the bill could place 'profound risk' on workers' pensions due to the volatility of crypto assets and point to the surge in crypto-related fraud, with an estimated $14 billion lost to scams in 2025 alone.

QDespite the strong pushback, what is the current status of negotiations on the bill according to the Senate Banking Committee Chair?

ASenate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott confirmed that negotiations are still active, stating that 'everyone is at the table working in good faith' to find a path forward.

Letture associate

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

In recent months, the rapid growth of the AI industry has attracted significant talent from the crypto sector. A persistent question among researchers intersecting both fields is whether blockchain can become a foundational part of AI infrastructure. While many previous AI and Crypto projects focused on application layers (like AI Agents, on-chain reasoning, data markets, and compute rentals), few achieved viable commercial models. Gensyn differentiates itself by targeting the most critical and expensive layer of AI: model training. Gensyn aims to organize globally distributed GPU resources into an open AI training network. Developers can submit training tasks, nodes provide computational power, and the network verifies results while distributing incentives. The core issue addressed is not decentralization for its own sake, but the increasing centralization of compute power among tech giants. In the era of large models, access to GPUs (like the H100) has become a decisive bottleneck, dictating the pace of AI development. Major AI companies are heavily dependent on large cloud providers for compute resources. Gensyn's approach is significant for several reasons: 1) It operates at the core infrastructure layer (model training), the most resource-intensive and technically demanding part of the AI value chain. 2) It proposes a more open, collaborative model for compute, potentially increasing resource utilization by dynamically pooling idle GPUs, similar to early cloud computing logic. 3) Its technical moat lies in solving complex challenges like verifying training results, ensuring node honesty, and maintaining reliability in a distributed environment—making it more of a deep-tech infrastructure company. 4) It targets a validated, high-growth market with genuine demand, rather than pursuing blockchain integration without purpose. Ultimately, the boundaries between Crypto and AI are blurring. AI requires global resource coordination, incentive mechanisms, and collaborative systems—areas where crypto-native solutions excel. Gensyn represents a step toward making advanced training capabilities more accessible and collaborative, moving beyond a niche controlled by a few giants. If successful, it could evolve into a fundamental piece of AI infrastructure, where the most enduring value in the AI era is often created.

marsbit9 h fa

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

marsbit9 h fa

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

A US researcher's visit to China's top AI labs reveals distinct cultural and organizational factors driving China's rapid AI development. While talent, data, and compute are similar to the West, Chinese labs excel through a pragmatic, execution-focused culture: less emphasis on individual stardom and conceptual debate, and more on teamwork, engineering optimization, and mastering the full tech stack. A key advantage is the integration of young students and researchers who approach model-building with fresh perspectives and low ego, prioritizing collective progress over personal credit. This contrasts with the US culture of self-promotion and "star scientist" narratives. Chinese labs also exhibit a strong "build, don't buy" mentality, preferring to develop core capabilities—like data pipelines and environments—in-house rather than relying on external services. The ecosystem feels more collaborative than tribal, with mutual respect among labs. While government support exists, its scale is unclear, and technical decisions appear driven by labs, not state mandates. Chinese companies across sectors, from platforms to consumer tech, are building their own foundational models to control their tech destiny, reflecting a broader cultural drive for technological sovereignty. Demand for AI is emerging, with spending patterns potentially mirroring cloud infrastructure more than traditional SaaS. Despite challenges like a less mature data industry and GPU shortages, Chinese labs are propelled by vast talent, rapid iteration, and deep integration with the open-source community. The competition is evolving beyond a pure model race into a contest of organizational execution, developer ecosystems, and industrial pragmatism.

marsbit10 h fa

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

marsbit10 h fa

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

Corning, a 175-year-old glass company, is experiencing a dramatic revival as a key player in AI infrastructure, driven by surging demand for high-performance optical fiber in data centers. AI data centers require vastly more fiber than traditional ones—5 to 10 times as much per rack—to handle high-speed data transmission between GPUs. This structural demand shift, coupled with supply constraints from the lengthy expansion cycle for fiber preforms, has created a significant supply-demand gap. Nvidia has invested in Corning, along with Lumentum and Coherent, in a $4.5 billion total commitment to secure the optical supply chain for AI. Corning's competitive edge lies in its expertise in producing ultra-low-loss, high-density, and bend-resistant specialty fiber, which is critical for 800G+ and future 1.6T data rates. Its deep involvement in co-packaged optics (CPO) with partners like Nvidia further solidifies its position. While not the largest fiber manufacturer globally, Corning's revenue from enterprise/data center clients now exceeds 40% of its optical communications sales, and it has secured multi-year supply agreements with major hyperscalers including Meta and Nvidia. Financially, Corning's optical communications revenue has surged, doubling from $1.3 billion in 2023 to over $3 billion in 2025. Its stock price has risen nearly 6-fold since late 2023. Key future catalysts include the rollout of Nvidia's CPO products and the scale of undisclosed customer agreements. However, risks include high current valuations and potential disruption from next-generation technologies like hollow-core fiber. The company's long-term bet on light over electricity, maintained even through the telecom bubble crash, is now being validated by the AI boom.

marsbit11 h fa

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

marsbit11 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片