Coinbase Flags Concerns Over CLARITY Bill

TheNewsCryptoОпубликовано 2026-01-12Обновлено 2026-01-12

Введение

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

Связанные с этим вопросы

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.

Похожее

From 'Old Dogs' to 'New Darlings': How AI is Revaluing Old Infrastructure, from Dell to Nokia

"Old Dogs" Become AI's New Darlings: Revaluing Legacy Infrastructure The AI investment narrative is shifting. Beyond the spotlight on core chipmakers like Nvidia, a new wave of interest is rising for legacy tech companies—Dell, HPE, Nokia, Cisco, Corning, Western Digital—once labeled as slow-growth, outdated stories. This resurgence stems from AI's evolution from model development to real-world deployment, creating massive demand for physical infrastructure. As AI moves into data center construction and enterprise adoption, the focus turns to who can actually build and deliver complex systems. These established players hold decades of experience in supply chains, integration, networking, and enterprise delivery—assets now critical for scaling AI. The revaluation can be grouped into three key infrastructure areas: 1. **Servers & Integration (e.g., Dell, HPE):** They are becoming essential system integrators, transforming GPUs into full-scale AI servers with networking, power, and cooling, then delivering them to clients. Strong recent earnings and AI-specific revenue/order growth for Dell and HPE underscore this shift. 2. **Networking & Connectivity (e.g., Corning, Nokia, Cisco):** As AI clusters grow, high-speed data transfer becomes paramount. Corning benefits from fiber demand for data center links, Nokia is exploring AI-integrated wireless networks (AI-RAN), and Cisco sees surging orders for data center switches—all critical for efficient AI operations. 3. **Storage (e.g., Western Digital, Seagate):** The AI data explosion requires vast capacity. Beyond high-speed memory (HBM), there's growing need for high-capacity HDDs to store training data, logs, video, and cold/archival data cost-effectively. This revaluation, however, is not a blanket endorsement. True reassessment requires concrete proof: AI-driven orders and revenue growth, upward revisions to company guidance, and sustainable improvements in profit quality, not just top-line sales. In essence, AI is not turning all old tech firms into high-growth stocks; it is selectively re-pricing the "old assets" of companies that are mission-critical for building the new AI infrastructure, transforming their legacy capabilities into renewed growth engines.

marsbit5 мин. назад

From 'Old Dogs' to 'New Darlings': How AI is Revaluing Old Infrastructure, from Dell to Nokia

marsbit5 мин. назад

Probability in the Price: How World Cup Odds Are Calculated

**The Probability in the Price: How World Cup Odds Are Calculated** Two major systems released their "championship probabilities" before the 2026 World Cup, and they disagreed on the favorite. Prediction market aggregators listed France at around **17%**, while the Opta supercomputer gave European champion Spain **16.1%**. These numbers look similar, but their production methods are fundamentally different. The market's **17%** is the **price** that clears after hundreds of millions of dollars in trading across platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi, where contracts trade between 0 and 100 cents, directly representing implied probability. This liquidity is provided by crypto-native market makers like Wintermute, though the market still has "the liquidity profile of an early-stage" asset class. In contrast, Opta's **16.1%** is a **simulated frequency**. Its model uses team data (including betting market odds as an input) to estimate match probabilities, then runs **10,000 full tournament simulations**, counting how often each team wins. Which is more accurate? There is **no rigorous, cross-tournament academic study** directly comparing their track records. However, a persistent **longshot bias**—where low-probability outcomes are systematically overvalued—observed in traditional betting for nearly a century, has also been found in modern crypto prediction markets. Research shows low-price contracts on Kalshi/Polymer less likely to pay out than their implied odds suggest. Unlike traditional bookmakers, prediction markets operate on **public blockchain ledgers**, making every transaction auditable and enabling such research. However, price formation is also influenced by **regulatory uncertainty**, as seen in recent US state-level bans and legal battles over jurisdiction. In summary, the "probability" you see is either a **market-clearing price** subject to behavioral biases and liquidity constraints, or a **model-simulated frequency** that partially incorporates market data. The question of which method is more reliable remains open, highlighting the importance of asking: **How was this number produced?**

marsbit34 мин. назад

Probability in the Price: How World Cup Odds Are Calculated

marsbit34 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片