Is the Crypto Market Doomed to Face Pressure in Q1? Progress of the CLARITY Act Becomes a Key Factor

marsbitPublicado em 2026-01-13Última atualização em 2026-01-13

Resumo

The CLARITY Act, introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on May 29, 2025, aims to provide regulatory clarity for the digital asset market. It is currently stalled in the Senate after being received and referred to committee. Market participants are concerned that without significant progress in Q1, the bill faces increasing obstacles. Key reasons include the limited legislative window in the Senate from January to March, which is typically reserved for complex, non-urgent bills like CLARITY. If no substantive committee action occurs in January, the bill risks being sidelined by the legislative schedule. The Act is not a minor policy adjustment but a restructuring of regulatory authority, making it slow-moving, highly amendable, and prone to delays rather than outright rejection. If delayed until after the midterm elections, its prospects become even more uncertain due to potential shifts in Congressional power. Should Democrats gain influence post-election, the bill’s chances would likely decrease. Democratic leadership generally favors broader SEC authority, regulatory flexibility, and is hesitant to limit enforcement discretion—contrary to CLARITY’s goal of defining regulatory boundaries and reducing regulation by enforcement. In a Democrat-led Senate, the bill could be substantially rewritten, broken into smaller pieces, or indefinitely postponed. These factors explain the anxiety among U.S. crypto stakeholders and contribute to current market pessimism.

The purpose of the "CLARITY Act" is to provide "clarity at the regulatory boundaries" for the digital asset (crypto asset) market in the United States. It was introduced in the House of Representatives on May 29, 2025, primarily sponsored by Rep. French Hill, and is currently stuck at "received in the Senate and referred to committee." The market is widely concerned that if the CLARITY Act does not make significant progress in Q1, delays will make the situation increasingly unfavorable!

The reasons are multiple:

January is one of the few structural legislative windows for the Senate

Every year from January to March is the main period for the Senate to handle highly complex, non-urgent bills. The CLARITY Act falls into the category of a "highly complex + highly controversial + non-urgent" market structure bill, naturally ranking lower in priority. If it fails to enter substantive advancement (such as clear action at the committee level) in January, it is very likely to be "naturally squeezed out" by the overall legislative schedule.

CLARITY is not a policy patch, but a "regulatory power restructuring"
The characteristics of such bills are: slow progress, repeated demands for amendments, and a high tendency to be postponed rather than rejected.

Once delayed until after the midterm elections, variables will increase sharply

Midterm elections = a reset of the congressional power structure. Bills that have been advanced but not completed will have their priorities reshuffled. The CLARITY Act, which has not yet taken effect, has not formed strong bipartisan consensus, and highly relies on the support of the current committee, is very likely to be "re-evaluated" or even redrafted after a change in the power structure.

If the Democratic Party gains an advantage in the midterm elections, the probability of passage will be even lower The mainstream stance of the Democratic Party tends to: strengthen the coverage of securities laws, retain regulatory agency interpretation flexibility, and be highly cautious about "limiting the space for law enforcement agencies through legislation."
The core effect of the CLARITY Act, however, is to: predefine some regulatory boundaries, limit "regulation by enforcement," and reduce the SEC's discretionary power in gray areas. Therefore, in a Senate environment dominated by Democrats, the CLARITY Act is more likely to: be required to undergo substantial revisions (effectively a rewrite), be broken down into multiple sub-bills, or be shelved for a long time.

Can you now understand the attention and anxiety of crypto professionals in the U.S. regarding the CLARITY Act and the current sluggishness of the crypto market?

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main purpose of the CLARITY Act mentioned in the article?

AThe CLARITY Act aims to provide regulatory clarity and establish clear boundaries for the digital asset (crypto asset) market in the United States.

QWhy is January considered a critical legislative window for the CLARITY Act in the Senate?

AJanuary is one of the few structural legislative windows in the Senate, as the period from January to March is typically used to handle highly complex, non-urgent bills. If the CLARITY Act does not see substantial progress (such as committee-level action) by January, it risks being pushed out of the legislative schedule.

QHow might the midterm elections impact the progression of the CLARITY Act?

AThe midterm elections could lead to a reset of congressional power structures, causing bills that are in progress but not yet passed to have their priorities reshuffled. The CLARITY Act, which lacks strong bipartisan consensus and relies heavily on current committee support, is particularly vulnerable to being re-evaluated or even redrafted after the elections.

QWhy would the CLARITY Act face lower chances of passing if Democrats gain an advantage in the midterm elections?

ADemocrats generally favor strengthening securities law coverage, preserving regulatory agency flexibility, and are cautious about limiting enforcement agency discretion through legislation. The CLARITY Act, which aims to predefine regulatory boundaries and restrict 'regulation by enforcement,' would likely face significant amendments, be broken into sub-bills, or be shelved indefinitely in a Democrat-dominated Senate.

QWhat are the key characteristics of the CLARITY Act that make its legislative process challenging?

AThe CLARITY Act is a highly complex and controversial market structure bill that is non-urgent, making it low priority. It involves a 'regulatory power restructuring,' which leads to slow progress, frequent demands for revisions, and a high likelihood of delays rather than outright rejection.

Leituras Relacionadas

Annual Salary of Millions Competing for Electricians, Meta Rushes to Open Its Own Technical School

The AI boom is facing an unexpected bottleneck: a severe shortage of skilled construction workers and electricians. As tech giants like Meta, OpenAI, and Alphabet race to build massive data centers—such as OpenAI's $16 billion "Stargate" project—they are hitting a critical labor wall. The U.S. needs an estimated 130,000 more electricians, 240,000 construction workers, and 150,000 supervisors by 2030 for AI infrastructure alone, but tens of thousands of electrician jobs go unfilled each year. While AI companies offer high premiums, with electricians earning up to $280,000 annually, worker scarcity still causes massive losses—delays on a single project can cost $14.2 million per month. The complexity of building AI data centers, which require immense power (equivalent to powering hundreds of thousands of homes), sophisticated electrical systems, and advanced liquid cooling solutions, demands highly skilled technicians who are in short supply. To combat this, companies are investing heavily in training. Meta has committed $115 million to a free training school offering tuition, housing, and stipends, targeting 5,000 new workers. OpenAI is partnering with unions to secure skilled labor. These efforts are paying off, with a significant rise in Gen Z interest in trade schools over college. However, the power demands are staggering. AI data centers are driving a rapid surge in electricity consumption, projected to account for up to 12% of U.S. power use by 2028 and raising costs for consumers. Furthermore, the construction boom is project-based, leading to a potential future glut of trained workers once building peaks, which could depress wages industry-wide. The race for AI supremacy now depends as much on skilled hands as on advanced chips.

marsbitHá 7m

Annual Salary of Millions Competing for Electricians, Meta Rushes to Open Its Own Technical School

marsbitHá 7m

OpenAI No Longer Sells Its Most Expensive Model for Profit

OpenAI is shifting its business strategy away from promoting its most expensive, flagship models for every task. Recent price cuts—80% for GPT-5.6 Luna and 20% for Terra—signal a deeper change: the company now actively advises users that many tasks don't require the most powerful model. Instead, OpenAI recommends a tiered approach: use the high-end GPT-5.6 Sol for complex planning and analysis, then delegate execution to cheaper models like Luna. This mirrors moves by Anthropic, which recently launched Claude Opus 5 at half the price of its top model, Fable 5. Both companies are de-emphasizing flagship models as primary revenue drivers, using them instead for brand prestige and technological showcases. The industry is entering a "mass-market" phase, similar to automotive, where high-volume, cost-effective models handle daily operations and drive scale. OpenAI's price reductions are partly enabled by AI models themselves optimizing underlying code and infrastructure, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of efficiency gains and cost reduction. Competition is shifting from "who is smartest" to "who offers the best value." The goal is no longer selling individual models but fostering widespread API adoption and ecosystem lock-in. By making AI calls cheap and ubiquitous, companies like OpenAI aim to become the indispensable, utility-like infrastructure powering automated workflows—the "water and electricity" of software, quietly embedded everywhere.

marsbitHá 7m

OpenAI No Longer Sells Its Most Expensive Model for Profit

marsbitHá 7m

Suspected 4th Coldcard attack wave sweeps 389 Bitcoin: Galaxy’s Thorn

Coldcard hardware wallet users are facing a new wave of coordinated attacks targeting a firmware flaw, with researcher Alex Thorn flagging 218 recent transactions moving approximately 389 Bitcoin from potentially impacted addresses. The attack pattern shows a high rate of transactions targeting unique victim addresses, differing from previous waves. The vulnerability, which causes affected devices to generate weaker wallet seeds, is estimated to have impacted over 1,100 wallets, leading to around $90 million in Bitcoin stolen. Thorn advises affected users who control their keys may attempt to move funds with a higher-fee transaction before the attacker's transactions are confirmed.

cointelegraphHá 14m

Suspected 4th Coldcard attack wave sweeps 389 Bitcoin: Galaxy’s Thorn

cointelegraphHá 14m

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

Bitcoin miners are capitulating as evidenced by a sustained drop in network hash rate and a record-steep 19.9% decline in mining difficulty, signaling the shuttering of unprofitable machines. However, in a significant divergence from historical patterns, the stocks of publicly traded mining companies have soared, with one major player gaining over 430% in the past year, even as BTC's price fell roughly 46%. This surge is largely attributed to these companies pivoting toward the more lucrative AI narrative. Simultaneously, miners face a structural squeeze. Daily block reward revenue in BTC terms has hit a new all-time low following the latest halving, with current dollar-denominated daily revenue around $30 million compared to a longer-term average of ~$40 million. Fee revenue remains negligible, covering less than one block's subsidy over a 28-day average and accounting for only about ten minutes of the network's daily security budget. This capitulation cycle is unique: miner stress and crypto price weakness have decoupled due to alternative revenue streams (AI), while the long-term reliance on increasing bitcoin prices to offset shrinking subsidies continues, with fee income still far from filling the impending gap.

marsbitHá 17m

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

marsbitHá 17m

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

The market's expectation for a September Fed rate hike surged dramatically in early August, jumping from under 50% to over 80% within a week. This shift followed a contentious July FOMC meeting, where a 9-3 vote to hold rates revealed growing dissent from hawkish members advocating for an immediate hike to combat persistent inflation. The primary catalyst for this repricing is rising oil prices, driven by renewed geopolitical tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, which threaten global supply. Energy costs directly influence inflation metrics, making the upcoming July CPI report (due August 12th) a critical data point. If it shows inflation reaccelerating, the probability of a September hike will solidify. For Bitcoin and crypto assets, this is typically bearish news. Bitcoin continues to behave as a high-beta, liquidity-sensitive risk asset. A rate hike raises the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets and could drive capital toward money markets, pressuring crypto prices in the short term. However, historical patterns suggest that if a hike is perceived as the end of a tightening cycle rather than the start, any negative price impact may be brief. U.S. stocks, particularly crypto-linked equities like Coinbase and growth-oriented tech stocks, are also vulnerable. Higher rates increase discount rates in valuation models, putting pressure on high-multiple companies. This coincides with a pivotal tech earnings season where investor focus has shifted from massive AI capital expenditure to tangible revenue and cash flow generation. Companies with negative cash flow and weak growth narratives could face heightened volatility if borrowing costs rise in September. In summary, a September Fed hike has evolved into a mainstream market scenario. Key factors to watch are oil prices, the July CPI report, and Fed communications, which will determine the final decision and its impact on volatile crypto and equity markets.

marsbitHá 17m