Senate Ag Delays Crypto Market Structure Markup to Late January

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-01-13Last updated on 2026-01-13

Abstract

The US Senate Agriculture Committee has delayed its markup of a major cryptocurrency market structure bill to the late January, as more time is needed to finalize details and secure bipartisan support. The legislation is critical for clarifying the regulatory roles of the CFTC and SEC over digital assets. Key unresolved issues include disputes over prohibiting stablecoin yields and incorporating strong ethics rules. Despite progress, political factors and the 2026 mid-term elections could further delay the bill's passage, with some predictions suggesting it may not be implemented until 2029.

The US Senate Agriculture Committee has deferred the date of their much-awaited markup on the big cryptocurrency market structure legislation to the last week of January as lawmakers rush to secure bipartisan support on bills affecting the regulation of cryptocurrencies in the US.

Committee on Appropriations Chairman John Boozman stated on Monday that he would like to proceed with a bill supported by both parties, but he requires additional time to finalize the remaining details. “We have indeed made progress and had constructive discussions as we look toward reaching this objective,” Boozman said. “Additional time is required before the bill proceeds to markup to finalize the remaining details and gain the support that this bill requires.”

Boozman went further to state that the committee would proceed to markup the last week of January, which pushed what had been planned for the current week.

Why this markup matters to crypto

Crypto industry leaders have closely watched the Senate process because the market structure bill would clarify how the U.S.’s top market regulators, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, divide authority over digital assets.

The CFTC, meanwhile, falls under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Committee and is preferred by many crypto companies as a regulator for “digital commodities” spot markets. The Senate Banking Committee has direct oversight of the SEC and intends to vote on its own markup this week-a vote that Boozman is now delaying, keeping Washington’s crypto calendar active.

Notably, however, is that the Senate Act does not reproduce the same elements of the House CLARITY Act that passed successfully in July of 2025. This is because Senate procedures prevented a direct adoption of the previous House bill.

Stablecoin yield and ethics rules remain sticking points

While lawmakers work to bridge gaps, several issues remain unresolved and continue to slow consensus.

The first major controversy appears with stablecoin yields. Bank trade groups have called on the legislative branch to prohibit third-party providers, including crypto exchanges, from providing yields on stablecoins. The groups have stated that these yields cloud the distinction between stablecoins and interest-bearing deposits, particularly with the GENIUS Act preventing stablecoin issuers from paying yields.

On the other hand, the Democratic senators have been advocating for strong ethics and conflict-of-interest measures to be included in the bill. This comes as they require rules that would restrict officials, as well as President Donald Trump, from gaining any benefit due to connections to crypto projects or companies.

The crypto industry associations are also actively campaigning to ensure that the legislation does not consider software developers and non-custodial wallets to be “intermediaries,” meaning that they would be forced to comply with obligations that apply to financial middlemen.

The 2026 timeline is still uncertain

However, despite the rising momentum, there are predictions from certain policymakers that the future is not that bright. An investment bank, TD Cowen, has advised that political factors, including the mid-term elections, could dampen support. This implies that the bill might not be passed until the year 2027, and its implementation would be in 2029.

However, in the short term, Boozman’s filibuster puts the spotlight on the fact that, in crypto regulation, lawmakers need clarity but also can’t agree on the scope of regulation or who should benefit most from those regulations.

Highlighted Crypto News:

UK Lawmakers Push to Ban Crypto Donations Over Transparency and Foreign Influence Risks

TagsCFTCcrypto regulationcurrent market statusstablecoinsU.S Senate

Related Questions

QWhy has the Senate Agriculture Committee delayed the markup on the cryptocurrency market structure legislation?

AThe committee has deferred the markup to the last week of January to secure bipartisan support and finalize remaining details of the bill.

QWhich two US regulatory agencies' authority over digital assets would the market structure bill clarify?

AThe bill would clarify the division of authority between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

QWhat is one of the major sticking points regarding stablecoins in the legislation?

AA major controversy is whether third-party providers, like crypto exchanges, should be prohibited from offering yields on stablecoins, as it blurs the line with interest-bearing deposits.

QWhat specific measures are Democratic senators advocating to include in the bill?

ADemocratic senators are advocating for strong ethics and conflict-of-interest measures, including rules to prevent officials from benefiting due to connections to crypto projects.

QAccording to the investment bank TD Cowen, what could delay the passage of the crypto market structure bill until 2027?

APolitical factors, including the mid-term elections, could dampen support and delay the bill's passage until 2027, with implementation not until 2029.

Related Reads

Polymarket's "2028 Presidential Election" Volume King Is... LeBron James???

An article from Odaily Planet Daily, authored by Azuma, discusses a peculiar phenomenon observed on the prediction market platform Polymarket regarding the "2028 US Presidential Election" event. Despite having a real-time probability of less than 1%, unlikely candidates such as NBA star LeBron James (with $48.41 million in trading volume), celebrity Kim Kardashian ($33.84 million), and even ineligible figures like Elon Musk ($23.14 million) and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani ($18.39 million) account for approximately 70% of the total trading volume. In contrast, high-probability candidates like Vice President JD Vance ($10.58 million), California Governor Gavin Newsom ($15.71 million), and Secretary of State Marco Rubio ($9.32 million) have significantly lower trading activity. The article explains that this counterintuitive trend is not driven by irrational speculation but by rational strategies. Polymarket offers a 4% annualized holding reward for certain markets, including the 2028 election, to maintain long-term pricing accuracy. This yield exceeds the current 5-year US Treasury rate (3.98%), attracting large investors ("whales") to hold "NO" shares on low-probability candidates for risk-free returns. Additionally, some users utilize a platform feature that allows converting a set of "NO" shares into corresponding "YES" shares for better liquidity or pricing efficiency, rather than directly buying "YES" shares for their preferred candidates. Thus, the seemingly absurd trading activity is strategically motivated.

marsbit1h ago

Polymarket's "2028 Presidential Election" Volume King Is... LeBron James???

marsbit1h ago

Dialogue with ViaBTC CEO Yang Haipo: Is the Essence of Blockchain a Libertarian Experiment?

"ViaBTC CEO Yang Haipo: Blockchain as a Hardcore Libertarian Experiment" In a deep-dive interview, ViaBTC CEO Yang Haipo reframes the essence of blockchain, arguing it is not merely a new technology or infrastructure but a hardcore libertarian experiment. This experiment, born from the 2008 financial crisis and decades of cypherpunk ideology, tests a fundamental question: to what extent can freedom and self-organization exist without centralized trust? The discussion highlights the experiment's verified outcomes. On one hand, it has proven its core value of censorship resistance, providing critical financial lifelines for entities like WikiLeaks and individuals in hyperinflationary or sanctioned countries via tools like stablecoins. However, Yang points out a key paradox: the most successful product, USDT, is itself a centralized compromise, showing users prioritize a less-controlled pipeline over pure decentralization. On the other hand, the experiment has exposed the severe costs of this freedom—a "dark forest" without safeguards. Events like the collapses of LUNA, Celsius, and FTX, resulting in massive wealth destruction and prison sentences for founders, underscore the system's fragility and the inherent risks of an unregulated environment. Yang observes that despite decentralized protocols, human nature inevitably recreates centralized power structures, speculative frenzies, and narrative-driven cycles (from ICOs to Meme coins), where emotion and belonging often trump technological substance. Looking forward, he believes blockchain's future is significant but niche. Its real value lies in serving specific, real-world needs for financial sovereignty and bypassing traditional controls, not as a universal infrastructure replacing all centralized systems. For the average participant, Yang's crucial advice is to cultivate independent judgment. True freedom is not holding a crypto wallet, but possessing a mind resilient to groupthink and narrative hype in a high-risk, often irrational market.

marsbit1h ago

Dialogue with ViaBTC CEO Yang Haipo: Is the Essence of Blockchain a Libertarian Experiment?

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片