๐Ÿšจ ๐๐€๐๐Š๐’ ๐•๐’ ๐‚๐‘๐˜๐๐“๐Ž โ€” ๐’๐“๐€๐๐‹๐„๐‚๐Ž๐ˆ๐ ๐–๐€๐‘ ๐ˆ๐๐“๐„๐๐’๐ˆ๐…๐ˆ๐„๐’


The latest pushback from U.S. banking groups shows one thing clearly:
๐Ÿ‘‰ The battle over stablecoin yield is far from over.
Letโ€™s break this down like an analyst ๐Ÿ‘‡
๐Ÿ”ถ ๐–๐‡๐€๐“ ๐‰๐”๐’๐“ ๐‚๐‡๐€๐๐†๐„๐ƒ?
Under the proposed compromise in the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act:
๐Ÿ”ถ Direct yield (interest for simply holding stablecoins) โ†’ BANNED
๐Ÿ”ถ Activity-based rewards (DeFi usage, transactions, staking-like behavior) โ†’ ALLOWED
๐Ÿ‘‰ This is a middle-ground model โ€” not a full win for crypto, not full control for banks.
๐Ÿ”ถ ๐–๐‡๐˜ ๐๐€๐๐Š๐’ ๐€๐‘๐„ ๐’๐“๐ˆ๐‹๐‹ ๐”๐๐‡๐€๐๐๐˜
Major U.S. banking groups are signaling that even this compromise is not enough:
๐Ÿ”ถ They want stricter limits on stablecoin incentives
๐Ÿ”ถ Fear that โ€œactivity-based rewardsโ€ = backdoor yield
๐Ÿ”ถ Concern over deposit flight from traditional banks
๐Ÿ”ถ Regulatory imbalance between banks vs crypto firms
๐Ÿ‘‰ Translation:
Banks see this as crypto slowly replicating the banking model โ€” without banking rules
๐Ÿ”ถ ๐–๐‡๐€๐“ ๐“๐‡๐„ ๐๐Ž๐‹๐ˆ๐‚๐˜๐Œ๐€๐Š๐„๐‘๐’ ๐€๐‘๐„ ๐ƒ๐Ž๐ˆ๐๐†
Earlier, Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks signaled:
๐Ÿ”ถ The compromise is likely FINAL
๐Ÿ”ถ Banking criticism is acknowledged โ€” but not decisive
๐Ÿ”ถ Lawmakers are prioritizing innovation + control balance
๐Ÿ‘‰ Their stance:
โ€œWe respectfully agree to disagree.โ€
๐Ÿ”ถ ๐–๐‡๐€๐“ โ€œ๐€๐‚๐“๐ˆ๐•๐ˆ๐“๐˜-๐๐€๐’๐„๐ƒ ๐‘๐„๐–๐€๐‘๐ƒ๐’โ€ ๐‘๐„๐€๐‹๐‹๐˜ ๐Œ๐„๐€๐
This is the key loophole (or innovation, depending on perspective):
๐Ÿ”ถ Rewards for using stablecoins in protocols
๐Ÿ”ถ Incentives for liquidity provision
๐Ÿ”ถ Cashback-like or transaction-based benefits
๐Ÿ”ถ DeFi integrations that mimic yield indirectly
๐Ÿ‘‰ Important:
This keeps DeFi alive, even with a direct yield ban.
๐Ÿ”ถ ๐Œ๐€๐‘๐Š๐„๐“ ๐ˆ๐Œ๐๐‹๐ˆ๐‚๐€๐“๐ˆ๐Ž๐๐’
This compromise creates a new financial structure:
๐Ÿ”ถ Stablecoins remain competitive vs bank deposits
๐Ÿ”ถ DeFi protocols gain importance
๐Ÿ”ถ Centralized โ€œinterest accountsโ€ may decline
๐Ÿ”ถ Regulatory clarity improves institutional confidence
๐Ÿ‘‰ But also:
๐Ÿ”ถ Ongoing lobbying pressure from banks
๐Ÿ”ถ Risk of future tightening or amendments
๐Ÿ”ถ Uncertainty in how regulators interpret โ€œactivity-based rewardsโ€
๐Ÿ”ถ ๐“๐‘๐€๐ƒ๐ˆ๐๐† ๐‡๐„๐ˆ๐†๐‡๐“๐’โ„ข ๐•๐„๐‘๐ƒ๐ˆ๐‚๐“
This is not a victory for one side โ€” itโ€™s a strategic compromise shaping the next phase of crypto finance.
๐Ÿ”ถ Direct yield ban = short-term limitation
๐Ÿ”ถ Activity rewards = long-term innovation gateway
๐Ÿ”ถ Banks resisting = validation of real disruption
๐Ÿ‘‰ Key insight:
The system is evolving toward โ€œregulated DeFiโ€ instead of banned DeFi
$BTC โ€Œ
BTC2.21%
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • Comment
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
Add a comment
Add a comment
No comments
  • Pin