Coinbase Flags Concerns Over CLARITY Bill

TheNewsCryptoPublicado em 2026-01-12Última atualização em 2026-01-12

Resumo

Coinbase has threatened to withdraw its support for the upcoming CLARITY Act, a key U.S. crypto bill, if it restricts the ability of platforms to offer rewards on stablecoin holdings beyond basic disclosure rules. The exchange argues such limitations would harm its business and competition in the stablecoin market, particularly affecting rewards programs for assets like USD Coin. This stance follows the earlier GENIUS Act, which prohibited issuers from paying yields but allowed third-party platforms to offer rewards. Coinbase claims restricting platform-based rewards would undermine previous compromises and unfairly advantage traditional banks. The issue arises as policymakers work on broader crypto market reforms, with some senators seeking a compromise that would permit rewards only for chartered banks or trust companies.

As per the reports, it is speculated that Coinbase might withdraw its support for Washington’s upcoming major crypto bill. The firm is setting its boundaries as Congress moves closer to finalising its upcoming major crypto bill named the CLARITY Act.

In a report shared by Bloomberg on January 11, a warning surfaced as policymakers got ready to put up an extensive digital-asset market structure bill in the Senate later this week. Coinbase revealed that it may pull out its support for the CLARITY Act if it limits stablecoin rewards beyond fundamental disclosure rules.

As per the exchange, the issue directly hits its business and the competition in the stablecoin market, and the people close to the company’s thinking think alike. The ability to offer rewards on stablecoin balances, mainly USD Coin, remains at stake.

Association with the other Act

The debate trails through the GENIUS Act in July, which made the first federal framework for stablecoin issuers. That law bars creators from paying interest or yield associated only with holding stablecoins, but it does not obstruct third-party platforms from offering rewards to users.

Companies associated with crypto say that distinction was intentional. The officials from Coinbase state that prohibiting platform-based rewards would revoke compromises so far settled in the GENIUS Act and shift the field in favour of banks.

The firm has also mounted rewards as a way to make the role of the dollar in global digital finance more robust, mainly as different countries explore interest-bearing virtual currencies. Political pressure surrounding the bill is also increasing. In the election cycle of 2023-24, the crypto industry was leading in being the largest corporate political spender, in which Coinbase was a prominent donor.

The threat to withdraw support has weight as policymakers attempt to maintain momentum in the back of broader market structure reforms. Still, the final outcome is not clear. Some senators are looking for a middle ground that would permit rewards only for companies holding bank or trust charters.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

Bitcoin Holds Near $92K as Asia Rises Ahead of US CPI Data

TagsCoinbaseCrypto BillGenius ACT

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhy might Coinbase withdraw its support for the CLARITY Act?

ACoinbase may withdraw its support if the CLARITY Act limits stablecoin rewards beyond fundamental disclosure rules, as this directly impacts its business and competition in the stablecoin market.

QWhat is the main concern for Coinbase regarding the CLARITY Act?

AThe main concern is the potential restriction on the ability to offer rewards on stablecoin balances, particularly for USD Coin, which is a key part of its business model.

QHow does the GENIUS Act relate to the current debate over the CLARITY Act?

AThe GENIUS Act, passed in July, established the first federal framework for stablecoin issuers. It prohibits issuers from paying interest directly but allows third-party platforms to offer rewards. The current debate centers on whether the CLARITY Act will uphold this distinction.

QWhat is the crypto industry's argument for allowing platform-based stablecoin rewards?

AThe industry argues that prohibiting platform-based rewards would undo compromises made in the GENIUS Act and unfairly shift the competitive landscape in favor of traditional banks.

QWhat is one potential legislative compromise being considered regarding stablecoin rewards?

ASome senators are seeking a middle ground that would permit rewards only for companies that hold a bank or trust charter, attempting to balance innovation with regulatory oversight.

Leituras Relacionadas

Should You Buy SpaceX Stock at $1.7 Trillion? Here's What the Market Is Worried About

SpaceX is preparing for a massive IPO aiming to raise around $75 billion at a valuation of approximately $1.75 trillion. While its achievements in reusable rockets and the profitable Starlink satellite internet service are clear, the market is concerned about the aggressive valuation. Key issues include: the current $1.75 trillion valuation, which is about 94 times 2025 revenue, seems to price in not just existing businesses but also unproven future ventures like AI infrastructure and orbital data centers. Financially, while Starlink is profitable, the AI division, bolstered by the acquisition of xAI, is incurring massive losses and consuming the majority of capital expenditures. This acquisition also introduced complex related-party financing arrangements and debt onto SpaceX's balance sheet. Furthermore, corporate governance poses a challenge. SpaceX's dual-class share structure ensures founder Elon Musk retains absolute control, limiting ordinary shareholders' influence over high-risk, long-term strategic decisions. The future success of ambitious projects like the Starship rocket—critical for lowering costs and enabling new services—remains a significant variable for the valuation. In summary, the market's apprehension (FUD) centers not on doubting SpaceX's past technological triumphs but on questioning how much premium public investors should pay for a future that combines proven profits with highly speculative and capital-intensive new ventures, all under a governance structure that offers limited shareholder oversight.

marsbitHá 8m

Should You Buy SpaceX Stock at $1.7 Trillion? Here's What the Market Is Worried About

marsbitHá 8m

Breaking the DeFi Cascading Liquidation Curse: Vitalik Proposes a New Solution

Vitalik Buterin has proposed a new DeFi design to eliminate the automatic liquidation mechanism that causes market instability during sharp downturns. The current system, used by protocols like Aave, triggers forced sales when collateral value falls below a threshold, often exacerbating price drops and creating systemic selling pressure. Buterin's alternative model is based on splitting an asset like ETH into two synthetic option-like tokens, P and N, pegged to a price index. Their combined value always equals one ETH. Instead of sudden liquidation, a position's value gradually drifts from its target peg if the market moves. Users must proactively rebalance their holdings to maintain their desired exposure, transferring the management burden from the protocol to the user or automated tools. A key advantage is the reduced reliance on real-time oracles. Pricing decisions are deferred until contract expiry, allowing for more robust, fault-tolerant oracle designs. This removes a clear liquidation threshold that speculators can target for manipulation or MEV extraction. However, significant challenges remain. Frequent rebalancing could incur high slippage and transaction costs, necessitating new liquidity provider models. The design is better suited for hedging instruments than for stablecoins requiring a rigid 1:1 peg. While not an immediate replacement for existing systems, the proposal challenges the foundational assumption that instantaneous forced liquidation is an unavoidable necessity in DeFi, opening the door for fundamentally different risk management architectures.

marsbitHá 13m

Breaking the DeFi Cascading Liquidation Curse: Vitalik Proposes a New Solution

marsbitHá 13m

The End of Single-Factor Cryptography

The article "The End of Single-Factor Crypto" posits a fundamental shift in the cryptocurrency ecosystem. It argues the era where crypto asset valuations were predominantly driven by, and correlated with, Bitcoin's price is ending. The space is bifurcating into two distinct economies: endogenous and exogenous. The endogenous economy represents traditional crypto, where token and project values are directly tied to crypto market prices. The emerging exogenous economy comprises projects and businesses that may utilize blockchain technology or tokens but derive their fundamental value from external, non-crypto factors like consumer demand, subscription revenue, or real-world utility. Examples include AI inference platforms like Venice, fintech lenders using blockchain for efficiency, and stablecoin/payment infrastructure companies acquired by giants like Mastercard and Stripe. This shift means investment analysis must change. For exogenous assets, evaluating traditional business fundamentals—such as revenue streams, unit economics, and competitive moats—becomes more critical than tracking Bitcoin charts. While endogenous assets like Bitcoin remain relevant, the growth of the exogenous category is driven by measurable demand independent of crypto price cycles, paving the way for a new, more diversified market phase. Consequently, crypto is evolving from a single-factor, reflexive asset class into a multifaceted ecosystem with varied drivers and investment theses.

marsbitHá 13m

The End of Single-Factor Cryptography

marsbitHá 13m

Morning Post | Bitmine Plans to Raise $300 Million Through Preferred Stock Issuance; Polymarket Accuses Kalshi of Commercial Espionage

ChainCatcher's Daily Crypto Brief: Key developments from the past 24 hours include significant funding moves, regulatory actions, and market predictions. Bitmine announced a $300 million preferred stock fundraising. Polymarket accused rival prediction platform Kalshi of corporate espionage, citing numerous suspicious coincidences in product launches, a claim Kalshi strongly denied. The U.S. Department of Justice, in a joint "Disruption Week" anti-fraud operation with companies like Coinbase and Meta, froze over $3.8 million in cryptocurrency linked to scams. In infrastructure news, Macau completed its integration with the multi-central bank digital currency bridge, mBridge, aiming to build efficient cross-border payment channels. Cosmos Labs acquired the block explorer Mintscan. Market-wise, Geoffrey Kendrick, Standard Chartered's Head of Digital Assets Research, stated Bitcoin is nearing a bottom around $63,000, maintaining a year-end target of $100,000. He noted stability in U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF holdings. Ahead of SpaceX's anticipated IPO, internal insiders at Rocket Lab (RKLB) sold over $18.41 million in stock. In tokenization, Goldman Sachs partnered with Apex and Archax to launch a tokenized real estate fund. The meme token tracker GMGN reported the top trending tokens: on Ethereum, HEX, SHIB, LINK, PEPE, mUSD; on Solana, TROLL, swarms, WORLDCUP, neet, Buttcoin; and on Base, PEPE, toby, ODDS, ELSA, SKI.

链捕手Há 28m

Morning Post | Bitmine Plans to Raise $300 Million Through Preferred Stock Issuance; Polymarket Accuses Kalshi of Commercial Espionage

链捕手Há 28m

55TB to 28TB? The Rumor and Panic Behind Rubin's Memory Being Halved

Title: 55TB to 28TB? The Rumor and Panic Behind the Potential Halving of Rubin's Memory. On June 4th, a report from SemiAnalysis suggested NVIDIA's next-gen Vera Rubin NVL72 AI rack may ship with roughly 28TB of SOCAMM DRAM per rack instead of the anticipated 55TB, primarily using 96GB modules. This sparked a market panic, causing Micron's stock to drop over 10% on fears of halved memory demand. However, the article argues this panic is misguided for several key reasons. First, SOCAMM modules are socketed and upgradeable, not soldered. Lower initial configuration doesn't mean permanent demand loss. Second, the primary driver is a severe 2026 LPDDR5X supply shortage, not diminished need. NVIDIA is likely prioritizing rack shipments with available components. Third, with fixed total LPDDR5X supply, using less per rack could allow NVIDIA to ship *more* racks, not necessarily reducing overall memory orders. Micron's sharp drop was also attributed to a broader semiconductor sell-off triggered by Broadcom's earnings, with the SemiAnalysis report providing a convenient narrative for profit-taking after Micron's massive rally. In summary: the report on lower default configurations is likely accurate, but interpreting it as a demand collapse is wrong. The real risk for Micron lies in its reportedly minimal HBM4 share for Rubin, not in potentially flexible SOCAMM demand. The sell-off appears more like a correction amplified by coinciding negative catalysts.

marsbitHá 44m

55TB to 28TB? The Rumor and Panic Behind Rubin's Memory Being Halved

marsbitHá 44m

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片

Categorias popularesright-arrow

Etiquetas Popularesright-arrow