Trump Backs U.S. Clarity Act, Accuses Major Banks of Undermining GENIUS

TheNewsCryptoОпубліковано о 2026-03-04Востаннє оновлено о 2026-03-04

Анотація

Former U.S. President Donald Trump has called for the enactment of the U.S. Clarity Act, which aims to link the country’s economic strength with clear cryptocurrency regulations. In a speech to lawmakers and industry representatives, Trump accused major financial institutions of stifling innovation by impeding technological progress. He argued that regulatory ambiguity has driven crypto businesses and talent overseas, and that well-defined legislation would attract investment and bolster U.S. financial competitiveness. Trump emphasized that legislative clarity would balance innovation with investor protection, warning that the U.S. risks falling behind other nations that offer more certain regulatory environments. The Clarity Act has garnered bipartisan support and seeks to clarify the roles of the CFTC and SEC regarding digital assets, potentially reducing compliance costs and encouraging market confidence. The bill also includes provisions for certain exemptions to foster innovation. Negotiations over the final language of the legislation are ongoing amid mixed reactions from financial institutions and other stakeholders.

The former president of the United States, Donald Trump, urged lawmakers to enact the U.S. Clarity Act, which links the economic prowess of the country with clear crypto rules. In a speech to lawmakers and industry representatives, Trump urged them to enact the Clarity Act to bring clarity to crypto markets. In the speech, Trump accused big financial institutions of undermining innovation in the country by slowing down technological advancements.

Trump claimed that unclear rules have harmed the development of crypto businesses and encouraged talent to move abroad. However, with clear legislation, the country can attract investment and increase its financial prowess globally. In addition, the former president urged lawmakers to avoid excessive regulation without clear legislative backing.

However, enforcement-based regulation, as described by Trump, creates uncertainty for both entrepreneurs and established businesses. According to him, legislative clarity can strike a balance between innovation and investor protection. The statements made by Trump underscored his view that America is at risk of losing a competitive advantage in digital asset regulation. He said that if other countries are able to provide certainty in their regulation, they could attract capital and talent from the American market.

Trump urged lawmakers to put aside their differences and help him move the Clarity Act forward. He said that the bill has already gained bipartisan support from both Congress and the Senate. The statements made by Trump underscored the debate about regulating new financial technologies. The Clarity Act has been supported by those who believe that institutional and retail participation can be facilitated by a clear legal framework, while others believe that poorly structured laws could become barriers to innovation.

Regulatory Context and Market Implications of the Clarity Act

The purpose of the Clarity Act is to determine the jurisdiction of the CFTC and the SEC in different digital assets. According to its proponents, this will help reduce compliance costs for crypto firms. Analysts have pointed out that regulatory confusion has been a problem for various platforms in the crypto space.

There is also a provision for special exemptions for different digital asset activities to encourage innovation in the space. According to various market participants who have been tracking the bill’s progress in Congress, this will help build confidence in the market. Different financial institutions have reacted to the bill in different ways.

Others recognize the potential for legal certainty to facilitate the integration of digital assets into traditional systems of finance. Negotiations on the language of the final bills are underway for lawmakers, and the debate continues on the response from various stakeholders before the final passage.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Pardoned BitMEX Cofounder Pledges £20 Million to London Maths Institute

TagsBlockchainCFTCClarity ACTDonald Trump PardonGenius ACTSECTRUMPU.SUnited States

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the main purpose of the U.S. Clarity Act according to Donald Trump?

AThe main purpose of the U.S. Clarity Act is to link the economic prowess of the country with clear crypto rules, bringing clarity to crypto markets and attracting investment.

QWho does Trump accuse of undermining innovation in the United States?

ATrump accuses big financial institutions of undermining innovation in the country by slowing down technological advancements.

QWhat two regulatory bodies' jurisdictions does the Clarity Act aim to determine for digital assets?

AThe Clarity Act aims to determine the jurisdiction of the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) and the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) for different digital assets.

QAccording to the article, what problem has regulatory confusion caused for crypto platforms?

ARegulatory confusion has been a problem for various platforms in the crypto space by increasing compliance costs and creating uncertainty.

QWhat potential benefit does the Clarity Act offer to encourage innovation, as mentioned by its proponents?

AThe Clarity Act offers special exemptions for different digital asset activities to encourage innovation in the space and help build market confidence.

Пов'язані матеріали

Why Pricing Social Interactions is Doomed to Fail?

Titled "Why Putting a Price on Social Interaction Is Doomed to Fail," this article critiques attempts to monetize social networks directly through SocialFi models, arguing their inevitable failure stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of media dynamics. Using Marshall McLuhan's theory of "hot" and "cold" media, the author posits that social networks are inherently "cold" media. Their value isn't contained in individual posts but is co-created through user participation, interpretation, and fragmented, ongoing interaction (e.g., replies, shares). This ambiguity and need for user involvement are core to their function. The article asserts that SocialFi projects like Friend.tech failed because introducing real-time, tradable financial pricing (a definitive "hot" signal) into this "cold" environment doesn't add a layer—it replaces the medium's essence. The unambiguous price signal overshadows and nullifies the nuanced, participatory social signal. Users become traders, not participants, and when speculative profits vanish, the underlying social ecosystem—never genuinely cultivated—collapses entirely. This principle extends beyond crypto. The author argues platforms like Twitter have gradually "heated up" through metrics (likes, retweets counts, algorithmically defined value), shifting users from participants to performers and eroding organic engagement. The solution isn't to abandon capital but to manage its entry point. Successful models like Substack, Patreon, or Bandcamp allow capital to "condense" at specific, isolated nodes (e.g., subscriptions, one-time payments) without permeating and "heating" every social interaction. They preserve the core "cold," participatory medium while enabling monetization at designated boundaries. The NFT boom and bust serves as a stark parallel: the ancient "cold" medium of collecting (valued for story, community, gradual accumulation) was rapidly destroyed by platforms that introduced real-time floor prices, rarity scores, and trading dashboards, transforming collectors into speculators and vaporizing cultural value when prices fell. The core lesson: "Liquidity equals heat." Injecting high liquidity and definitive pricing into a "cold" participatory medium doesn't optimize it; it fundamentally alters and destroys its value-creating mechanism. The future lies not in pricing every social gesture but in finding precise, non-invasive points for capital to condense without overheating the entire ecosystem.

marsbit8 хв тому

Why Pricing Social Interactions is Doomed to Fail?

marsbit8 хв тому

Jensen Huang's CMU Speech: In the AI Era, Don't Just Watch, Build

Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA and a first-generation immigrant, delivered the commencement address to Carnegie Mellon University's class of 2026. He shared his personal journey from a humble background to founding NVIDIA, emphasizing resilience, learning from failure, and the responsibility that comes with leadership. Huang framed the present moment as the dawn of the AI revolution, a shift he believes is more profound than previous computing waves. He described AI as fundamentally resetting computing—moving from human-written software to machines that understand, reason, and use tools. This will create a new industry for generating intelligence and transform every sector. While acknowledging AI's potential to automate tasks and displace some jobs, Huang distinguished between the *tasks* of a job and its core *purpose*. He argued AI will augment human capability, not replace humans. The real risk, he stated, is not AI itself, but people being left behind by those who effectively use AI. He presented AI as a generational opportunity for massive infrastructure investment—in chip factories, data centers, energy grids, and advanced manufacturing—that could re-industrialize nations like the U.S. and bridge the digital divide by making computing and intelligent tools accessible to all. Huang called for a balanced approach: advancing AI safely and responsibly, establishing prudent policies, ensuring broad access, and encouraging universal participation. He urged the graduates not to fear the future but to engage with optimism and ambition, reminding them of CMU's motto, "My heart is in the work." His core message was clear: this is their moment to actively build and shape the AI-powered future, not merely observe it.

marsbit1 год тому

Jensen Huang's CMU Speech: In the AI Era, Don't Just Watch, Build

marsbit1 год тому

The Era Has Arrived Where Human Writers Must Prove They Are Not Machines

The article describes an era where AI-generated content is flooding the market, forcing human authors to prove they are not machines. It begins with the example of dozens of AI-written, error-ridden biographies of Henry Kissinger appearing on Amazon within hours of his death, a pattern repeated for other deceased celebrities and even living experts who find fraudulent books under their names. This spam content has exploded, with monthly new book releases on platforms like Amazon reaching 300,000 by late 2025. The issue spans genres, from suspiciously high proportions of AI-written teen romance and self-help books to dangerous, AI-generated foraging guides containing lethal advice. The platforms' automated review systems, designed to catch plagiarism and banned words, are ill-equipped to detect AI-generated text that avoids these pitfalls while being nonsensical or fraudulent. The problem has infiltrated traditional publishing. A major publisher, Hachette, had to recall a bestselling horror novel after AI detection tools suggested 78% of its content was machine-generated. An acclaimed European philosophy book was later revealed to be entirely written by AI under a fake author persona. In response, authors are fighting back. At the 2026 London Book Fair, 10,000 writers published a blank book titled "Don't Steal This Book" containing only their signatures—using emptiness as a protest weapon in an age of AI overproduction. Initiatives like the "Human Author Certification" program have emerged, ironically placing the burden on humans to prove their work is not machine-made. The article warns of a vicious cycle: AI-generated low-quality books pollute the data used to train future AI models, leading to "model collapse" and an ever-worsening flood of digital waste, eroding trust in publishing and devaluing human creativity.

marsbit1 год тому

The Era Has Arrived Where Human Writers Must Prove They Are Not Machines

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片