‍#Gate广场五月交易分享

The "script" of U.S. cryptocurrency legislation in 2026! Will the CLARITY Act become law before July 4th?

Patrick Witt, the White House digital asset advisor, provided a clear timeline at the Miami Consensus Conference: before July 4th, the CLARITY Act (H.R.3633) will officially become law!

His words suggest this is an achievable timeline—cautiously worded, no guarantees, but it’s the most specific legislative commitment Washington has made so far. 2026 marks the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States; signing the bill at this milestone carries strong symbolic meaning.

The bill itself isn’t new; the CLARITY Act (H.R.3633) was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in July 2025 with a bipartisan vote of 294 to 134, and is now stuck in the Senate.

The core framework is clear: the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulates securities-type digital assets, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) oversees commodity-type digital assets, and exchanges are guided by corresponding regulatory directives based on the traded products.

It directly replaces the previous enforcement approach of SEC Chair Gary Gensler—shoot first, ask questions later—with a transparent set of rules.

Patrick Witt straightforwardly states that those days are over. For the crypto industry, this is indeed a turning point—the biggest part of compliance costs isn’t how strict the rules are, but how vague they are.

The reality is more complex than the logic chain of market surges following the bill’s passage. Polymarket currently predicts a 78% chance of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026, but not 100%. There will likely be some uncertainties and unforeseen events along the way.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, at the same Consensus event, directly said: if there are no ethics clauses, she will not support the vote.

Her demand is clear—prohibit the President, Vice President, members of Congress, and senior officials from profiting from the crypto industry through their internal positions.

Her exact words: "This is the worst form of quid pro quo, the worst campaign finance violations, and unconstitutional. If ethics clauses are not included in the bill, it will die outright in the Senate vote."

The White House digital asset advisor Patrick Witt said comprehensive rules are acceptable, but explicitly rejected clauses targeting specific officials or families.

Criminal concerns

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is reviewing the wording related to Section 1960 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code (unlicensed money transmission business). The issue isn’t regulation but criminal liability—will Safe Harbor protections shield developers who knowingly assist in money laundering?

This involves enforcement-sensitive areas like sanctions evasion, mixing services, and ransomware payments. Grassley and Durbin jointly opposed similar clauses in January. The outcome of his review will directly impact whether the bill can reach the finish line with substantial DeFi protections.

Currently, there are two main market logic layers:

First is the catalyst effect

Regardless of whether it ultimately passes, the bill’s progress itself fuels market sentiment—every committee update in May, every senator’s statement, could stir market emotions.

Bitcoin broke $80,000 on May 4th, and the Wall Street Bitcoin spot ETF saw a single-day net inflow of $630 million on May 1st (a recent high). These are no coincidences. The process of reducing regulatory uncertainty is inherently positive, even if the outcome remains uncertain.

The second is the actual impact

If the bill is enacted, the jurisdiction boundaries of the SEC and CFTC are expected to be clarified, ending the situation where control over a token depends solely on subjective judgment.

For institutional investors, a clear framework is indeed a prerequisite for entry (not all institutions are waiting on the sidelines, but a significant portion of funds are waiting for this signal)—once institutional money enters, it will lock in long-term, reducing circulating supply and logically supporting prices.