U.S. Treasury Pushes for Clarity Act to Secure Crypto Market Structure
By John Nada·Feb 10, 2026·6 min read
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent calls for the urgent passage of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act to establish regulatory clarity for cryptocurrencies in the U.S.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has been vocal about the pressing need for laws governing the cryptocurrency market, emphasizing the urgency to pass the stalled Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. During an interview on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures, Bessent stressed that establishing clear market structure rules is essential for the future viability of bitcoin and digital asset markets in the U.S. He indicated that the recent volatility in cryptocurrency markets underscores the critical need for legal certainty. "What we’re seeing in the crypto market over the past few months means more than ever that the U.S. needs market structure, we need clarity, and we need to get this across the line this spring," Bessent remarked, reinforcing the time-sensitive nature of the legislative initiative.
Bessent’s call to action is not merely a reflection of his personal views but rather represents a broader recognition among policymakers of the tumultuous nature of current crypto markets. The fluctuations in asset values, coupled with regulatory ambiguity, have created an environment where investors and companies alike find it challenging to navigate. The Clarity Act aims to provide a framework for the regulatory landscape surrounding cryptocurrencies, particularly concerning stablecoin yields and the regulatory roles of various agencies.
Despite the urgency expressed by Bessent, there remains significant resistance to the Clarity Act from certain factions within the cryptocurrency industry. He identified these groups as “recalcitrant actors” who would rather see the bill fail than engage in a compromise over contentious elements. This opposition is significant, as it highlights a divide within the crypto community itself. While many traditional financial firms and a broad array of companies involved in bitcoin and other digital assets align with the need for legislation, a vocal minority has resisted the proposed changes, fearing that regulation might stifle innovation.
Central to the debate surrounding the Clarity Act are provisions related to stablecoins—cryptocurrencies designed to maintain a stable value by pegging them to traditional currencies or assets. The proposed restrictions on rewards for stablecoin holdings have drawn criticism from major exchange executives. They argue that such limitations could undermine the competitiveness of U.S. exchanges and hinder innovation within the sector. The concern is that if American exchanges cannot offer attractive yields on stablecoins, investors may flock to platforms based in jurisdictions with more favorable regulations, thus geographically diversifying liquidity away from the U.S.
On the other side of the debate, banks and credit unions have raised alarms over the potential impact of high yields on stablecoin accounts. Their primary concern is that attractive yields offered by stablecoins could siphon deposits away from traditional banking institutions, which could have a cascading effect on lending activities. If consumers choose to store their funds in stablecoin accounts that offer better returns rather than in traditional bank accounts, banks may find themselves with reduced capital for lending, which could ultimately impact the broader economy.
Bessent acknowledges that the debate over these issues is both necessary and unavoidable. However, he asserts that reaching a resolution through legislation is far more desirable than allowing the market to exist in a legal vacuum. Such a legal void could lead to further instability and uncertainty, which could deter investment and innovation in the crypto space. He emphasized, "For crypto to remain a viable digital asset and move forward, we need to get this Clarity Act done," indicating the urgency of the situation.
The potential impact of the Clarity Act extends beyond just cryptocurrency markets; it has significant implications for the financial ecosystem at large. A robust regulatory framework could stabilize the domestic crypto environment, thereby attracting innovation and capital back to the U.S. This is increasingly important as other countries around the world are stepping up their regulatory frameworks for digital assets, creating competitive pressures that the U.S. cannot afford to ignore.
Bessent's comments also reflect a broader executive branch push to position the U.S. as a global leader in crypto regulation. He contended that a clear market structure regime would not only attract innovation but also help retain domestic talent. As digital assets continue to grow internationally, establishing a favorable regulatory environment in the U.S. could help secure the country's position as a hub for cryptocurrency innovation.
The ongoing negotiations indicate the complexity of reconciling differing viewpoints within Congress. Lawmakers involved in these discussions have expressed intentions to participate in further closed-door talks, which aim to bridge the gaps between competing interests ahead of key legislative deadlines. With the stakes this high, the outcome of these negotiations could set a precedent for how digital assets are regulated in the United States for years to come.
Another significant aspect of Bessent's agenda is the U.S. government's stance on its own bitcoin holdings. Earlier this year, Bessent stated that the government will cease selling seized bitcoin, instead opting to add it to the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. This decision underscores a strategic pivot in how the U.S. views its digital assets amidst increasing questions over bitcoin seizures related to cases involving Tornado Cash and Samourai Wallet developers. Bessent framed this move as part of a broader initiative to foster digital asset innovation within the U.S., suggesting that by holding onto these assets, the government is embracing the potential future value of cryptocurrencies.
As he outlined at the World Economic Forum in Davos, the decision to hold seized bitcoin instead of liquidating it aligns with Executive Order 14233, which mandates that forfeited bitcoin should be retained within the U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. This approach signifies a commitment to not only maintain a stake in digital assets but also to reinforce the U.S.’s role in the evolving landscape of cryptocurrency regulation.
In light of the complexities surrounding the Clarity Act and the ongoing dialogues in Congress, it is clear that the future of cryptocurrency regulation in the U.S. is at a crossroads. The successful passage of the Clarity Act could mark a transformative moment in the integration of digital assets into the mainstream financial system. As lawmakers continue to grapple with the intricacies of the legislation, the outcomes will likely have lasting implications for market participants at all levels.
As we await further developments, the importance of establishing a clear regulatory framework cannot be overstated. The stakes are high, not just for the cryptocurrency industry but for the overall financial landscape of the United States. The pressing need for clarity, competitiveness, and innovation is paramount, and the actions taken by lawmakers in the coming months will undoubtedly shape the future of digital assets in the country.