I recently noticed a major development in the US stablecoin legislation, and I feel that the impact of this matter on the entire crypto industry has been seriously underestimated.

Last week, Republican and Democratic senators finally agreed on a compromise for the most controversial stablecoin yield provisions in the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. This struggle, which has been going on since the beginning of this year, has involved the White House, banking lobbying groups, and the entire crypto industry—now, at last, it has reached a result.

So what is the core of the new proposal? Simply put, it prohibits digital asset service providers from paying interest or yields directly just because customers hold stablecoins. But there is a key exemption—rewards based on actual activity or transactions are not restricted. That is to say, as long as the rewards are tied to specific user behavior (such as payments, transfers, market making, staking, governance voting, or loyalty programs), platforms can continue to distribute them. Moreover, the reward amount can also be calculated based on factors such as the holding balance, holding period, or loyalty level, giving platforms plenty of room for design.

This is a good outcome for a major exchange. According to public data, in 2025 alone the exchange’s stablecoin business revenue is 1.35 billion US dollars, mainly coming from profit sharing with stablecoin issuers. The new stablecoin legislative framework allows them to continue profiting from this business on the premise of complying with regulations.

However, the banking industry has not fully backed down. The new law bans firms from claiming that stablecoins are “investment products” or that they have “federal deposit insurance,” and violations could result in fines of up to 5 million US dollars. More importantly, regulators must assess within two years whether the widespread adoption of dollar-pegged stablecoins will lead to outflows from traditional bank deposits—effectively leaving bargaining leverage for banking lobbying groups to restart negotiations later.

At present, the Senate Banking Committee has not announced an official review schedule. Even if the stablecoin bill passes the committee smoothly, it still needs to be coordinated with the Senate Agriculture Committee, then voted on by the full Senate, and finally negotiated with the version passed by the House last year. With this entire process, it’s unlikely that a definitive conclusion will be reached in the short term.

But in any case, the fact that this compromise has been reached in itself shows one thing: US policymakers and the industry have entered a more pragmatic phase of dialogue. It is no longer simply about whether something is banned or not, but rather about clearly defining rules and giving the industry reasonable space to develop. This is beneficial for advancing the stablecoin bill and for the long-term growth of the crypto market.