#Gate广场四月发帖挑战 Stablecoin interest payment disputes remain unresolved, and the CLARITY Act faces obstacles in Senate progress

The ongoing controversy over whether stablecoins are allowed to pay interest continues to intensify. The U.S. Digital Asset Market Structure Act, the CLARITY Act, has encountered setbacks in the Senate. As of April 2 local time, the bill has not yet passed the Senate Banking Committee's line-by-line review.
According to reports, the CLARITY Act was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on July 17, 2025, with 294 votes in favor and 134 against. It was originally expected that the bill would then move to the Senate for review and further legislative progress, but the schedule was subsequently delayed.
Under the bill's design, the U.S. digital asset regulatory framework would assign responsibilities according to regulatory agencies: the spot market for digital commodities would be overseen by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), while the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) would retain authority over "investment contract-type assets." According to this framework, Bitcoin might be classified as a commodity, while most other tokens could still be categorized as securities.
The core disagreement currently under discussion in the Senate centers on the issue of stablecoin "interest payments." Under the proposed adjustments, the bill may prohibit earning yields solely from holding stablecoins but could allow reward mechanisms linked to payment, remittance, and other usage scenarios. The previously passed GENIUS Act explicitly bans stablecoin issuers from paying interest to holders.
The Senate Banking Committee was scheduled to begin line-by-line review in January this year but was later temporarily postponed.
Reports indicate that after Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong publicly stated that he "cannot support the current provisions," the Republican stance showed signs of wavering. As one of the key lobbying forces in the crypto industry, public opposition from related companies has also made the committee more cautious in advancing the bill.
Subsequently, on March 20, Republican Senator Tom Tillis and Democratic Senator Angela Alsobrooks announced that both sides had reached a consensus on the overall direction of "banning interest payments solely for holding, and allowing reward mechanisms tied to actual usage." However, industry insiders raised doubts during a closed-door review on March 23, arguing that the bill's language regarding stablecoin rewards is too narrow and that the definitions remain unclear.
The controversy did not end there. Democrats believe that the DeFi-related provisions in the bill are insufficient to address risks such as money laundering and sanctions evasion. Meanwhile, concerns over conflicts of interest related to the Trump family issuing meme coins and participating in DeFi projects continue to escalate, with calls to include ethical clauses in the bill and prohibit public officials from profiting personally from cryptocurrency activities.
Political uncertainties are also increasing. On March 26, the White House confirmed that David Sacks, the presidential advisor responsible for cryptocurrency and AI affairs, has concluded his term, and no successor has been announced yet. Coinbase Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal said in an interview with Fox Business on April 1 that an agreement on stablecoin interest payments could be reached within 48 hours. However, even if the line-by-line review occurs in late April, the bill still needs to pass a full Senate vote requiring 60 votes, as well as be integrated with the Agriculture Committee version, coordinated with the House version, and signed by the President. The timeframe for the full Senate vote is limited to before August 2026.
From the current perspective, the CLARITY Act is no longer just a technical issue for improving crypto regulation but has become a litmus test for how much the U.S. is willing to incorporate financial innovation into its institutional framework. #稳定币争议升温