Senate Ag Delays Crypto Market Structure Markup to Late January

TheNewsCryptoPublicado em 2026-01-13Última atualização em 2026-01-13

Resumo

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

Perguntas relacionadas

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.

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

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 18m

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

marsbitHá 18m

Trading

Spot
活动图片