CLARITY Act News: Coinbase CEO Responds To Dimon While JPMorgan Sees Low Odds Of 2026 Passage

bitcoinistОпубліковано о 2026-06-04Востаннє оновлено о 2026-06-04

Анотація

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong responded to JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon's criticism of the CLARITY Act, a crypto regulation bill, calling Dimon's personal remarks "kind of sad" while expressing personal respect. Armstrong argued the bill would benefit traditional banks by providing a clearer regulatory framework and also help crypto companies, urging a focus on passing the legislation. Dimon had stated banks would not accept the current bill and predicted continued resistance from traditional finance. Meanwhile, JPMorgan analysts indicated the odds of the bill passing in 2026 are low, citing time constraints, the approaching midterm elections, and legislative hurdles like stablecoin yield debates.

In an interview with Politico, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong pushed back on JPMorgan Chase chief Jamie Dimon’s criticism of the CLARITY Act. At the same time, the bank’s analysts said that the odds of the bill clearing Congress and reaching President Trump’s desk this year are becoming increasingly slim.

CLARITY Act Would Be ‘Good For The Banks’

Armstrong told Politico that it was “kind of sad” to hear Dimon call him “full of shit.” He said he has “a lot of respect for Jamie Dimon,” adding that while they disagree on the crypto bill, he still respects the banker personally.

Coinbase CEO said he believes the regulatory framework in the CLARITY Act would ultimately be beneficial for traditional banks, and he was surprised by Dimon’s tone. He suggested that the level of intensity in public commentary can blur nuance, saying, “When people communicate through the media, nuance gets lost.”

Armstrong further argued that the bill could be helpful beyond Wall Street—stating that it would be “great for crypto companies as well.” In his view, the goal should be to move past rigid positions and focus on getting the legislation “over the finish line.”

The exchange comes after NewsBTC reported on Dimon’s comments, in which he said banks “will not accept” the CLARITY Act in its current form.

Dimon also suggested that efforts by crypto supporters were unlikely to build a broad consensus with traditional financial institutions, warning that there would be continued resistance rather than convergence.

He said the act would be fought and added that no one would “bow down” to either Armstrong or crypto-related figures, arguing that someone associated with the lobbying push was spending “hundreds of millions of dollars in Washington” on the legislation.

Midterms Reduce Chances This Year

In the Politico interview, Armstrong said he was “a little perplexed by that,” and reiterated that he believes the CLARITY Act would help the banking sector and create clearer rules for the crypto industry.

Rather than treating the debate as a matter of winning or losing, Armstrong framed it as a test of whether lawmakers can complete the process and finalize the bill.

Nevertheless, when JPMorgan analysts consider the timing of the bill, they conclude that constraints are tightening rather than easing. They argue that it is becoming increasingly difficult to pass and fully approve the crypto bill in time this year, especially with the midterm elections approaching.

The analysts pointed to several factors that could slow progress, including the debate over stablecoin yields and the remaining legislative hurdles, such as the ethics provision related to President Trump’s links to the industry.

The daily chart shows the exchange’s stock, COIN, and its retrace to $163 on Thursday. Source: COIN on TradingView.com

Featured image created with OpenArt; chart from TradingView.com

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the main topic of disagreement between Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon?

AThey disagree on the CLARITY Act, a proposed crypto regulatory bill. Armstrong believes it would be beneficial for both crypto companies and traditional banks, while Dimon and JPMorgan are strongly opposed to it in its current form.

QAccording to JPMorgan analysts, why are the chances of the CLARITY Act passing in 2026 becoming slim?

AJPMorgan analysts cite several factors, including the approaching midterm elections, debates over stablecoin yields, and remaining legislative hurdles like the ethics provision related to President Trump's links to the crypto industry.

QHow did Brian Armstrong characterize Jamie Dimon's public criticism of him?

AArmstrong said it was 'kind of sad' to hear Dimon call him 'full of shit.' He expressed respect for Dimon personally but noted that public commentary through media often loses nuance.

QWhat did Jamie Dimon suggest about the efforts of crypto supporters to pass the CLARITY Act?

ADimon suggested that crypto supporters' efforts were unlikely to build a broad consensus with traditional financial institutions. He warned of continued resistance, stating that no one would 'bow down' to crypto figures and that the act would be fought.

QHow does Brian Armstrong frame the debate over the CLARITY Act, according to the article?

AArmstrong frames the debate not as a matter of winning or losing, but as a test of whether lawmakers can complete the legislative process and get the bill 'over the finish line' to create clearer rules for the industry.

Пов'язані матеріали

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.

marsbit6 хв тому

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

marsbit6 хв тому

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?**

marsbit35 хв тому

Probability in the Price: How World Cup Odds Are Calculated

marsbit35 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片