Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
CFD
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Promotions
AI
Gate AI
Your all-in-one conversational AI partner
Gate AI Bot
Use Gate AI directly in your social App
GateClaw
Gate Blue Lobster, ready to go
Gate for AI Agent
AI infrastructure, Gate MCP, Skills, and CLI
Gate Skills Hub
10K+ Skills
From office tasks to trading, the all-in-one skill hub makes AI even more useful.
GateRouter
Smartly choose from 40+ AI models, with 0% extra fees
#Gate广场五月交易分享 > Prediction of the Clear Bill Outcome
May 14th is the day for the vote on the Clear Bill, and lobbying efforts are now at a fever pitch. The banking coalition is frantically pushing back, attempting to steal the house.
In the past day, the American Bankers Association issued an emergency mobilization to all U.S. bank executives, urging them to contact members of the Senate Banking Committee immediately. They also submitted two technical amendment proposals, with the core demand being to completely block Section 404, which pertains to the rewards for stablecoin activities.
The probability of the bill passing on Polymarket has dropped from 80% to 62%, and last night, the US stock CRCL plummeted. This indicates that the market is indeed fearful of the final counterattack by the banking coalition. This uncertainty is precisely what causes the CRCL market to fluctuate back and forth. This sense of reverence shows that the market leaders understand well that in Washington, logic has never been the main factor; the density of lobbying funds is what truly matters.
Based on the current draft text and behind-the-scenes trends, there are three possibilities: 1. Maintain the status quo (40% probability). Explicitly prohibit paying interest solely for holding, with exemptions for activity rewards based on trading, liquidity, and staking. This version is the bottom line for Coinb and Circle. 2. Slight adjustment of standards (40% probability). To appease the banking pushback, a revision clause might be added to reassure the banking coalition. For example, increasing compliance reviews, requiring Circle and Coinb to periodically verify that their activity rewards are not paid on time or in fixed amounts, proving they are not interest or interest variants. This change would not cancel rewards but would increase compliance costs. Although it adds another layer of restrictions, it at least preserves the fundamental business logic. 3. Complete cut (20% probability). A low-probability event, but the most feared one—worrying that the banking coalition might team up with far-right legislators for a surprise attack. After all, bipartisan consensus on the bill is not inherently unbreakable.
For CRCL investors, of course, option 1 is the best, and option 2 is acceptable. If the unlikely event occurs, it would be devastating for CRCL. The fluctuations in the passing probability on Polymarket also reflect that, although unlikely, it is still possible.
The banking coalition’s counterattack is driven by their fear that CRCL could form a new financial infrastructure combining USDC, legal identity, and payment networks. They want to use this tactic to force CRCL into a pure wallet without interest or rewards, thus maintaining the banks’ absolute monopoly on cheap funds.
After stalling in the Senate for so long, if it passes smoothly today, it will be more enforceable and durable than the House version, meaning it has gained the approval of traditional U.S. financial powers—old money. If the banking coalition manages to steal the house, it would collapse the valuation logic, turning CRCL from an internet-based new financial ecosystem into a tightly regulated traditional remittance tool.
The grand show is about to begin—this is a zero-sum game of new money seizing power and old money defending the fortress.
May 14 is the day marked for the Clear Bill vote. Now lobbying from all sides has reached a fever pitch, and the banking coalition is launching a frantic counteroffensive, trying to “steal the house.”
Within the past day, the American Bankers Association issued an emergency mobilization order to bank executives across the United States, instructing them to contact members of the Senate Banking Committee immediately. It also submitted two consecutive technical amendment proposals. The core demand is to completely shut down Section 404—i.e., the provisions for rewards tied to stablecoin activity.
The probability of the bill passing on Polymarket fell from 80% to 62%, and CRCL plunged in U.S. stocks last night. This shows that the market is truly in awe of the banking coalition’s final counterattack. This kind of uncertainty is what causes the CRCL board to repeatedly pull back and forth. This sense of awe indicates that the market’s main players clearly understand that in Washington, logic has never been what matters—the density of lobbying funds is what counts.
According to the current draft text and the direction of the “winds” in the background, there are three possible outcomes: 1) Maintain the status quo (probability 40%). Clearly prohibit paying interest solely due to holding, and exempt activity rewards based on transactions, liquidity, and staking. At present, this version is the bottom line for Coinb and Circle. 2) Fine-tune the standards (probability 40%). To calm the banking coalition’s pushback, they may add a revision clause to reassure the banks—for example, adding requirements for compliance review. Circle and Coinb would be required to be reviewed on a scheduled basis to verify that their activity rewards are not issued on time or in fixed, predetermined amounts, to show that they are not interest or a variant of interest. This modification would not cancel the rewards, but it would increase compliance costs. Although it adds another layer of shackles, at least it preserves the foundation of the business logic.
3) Fully gut it (probability 20%). It’s a low-probability event, but the one they’re most worried about—it’s exactly this scenario. They fear that the banking coalition could team up with far-right lawmakers to launch a surprise raid. After all, bipartisan consensus like this on a bill is not necessarily unbreakable.
For CRCL investors, of course option 1 is best, and option 2 is also acceptable. If the low-probability event really happens, the impact on CRCL would be catastrophic. The fluctuation in the bill’s passing probability on Polymarket also makes it clear that although it’s low probability, it’s still possible.
The reason the banking coalition is fighting back is that they fear CRCL forming a set of new financial infrastructure: USDC + legal identity + a payments network. They want to force CRCL—using this kind of “ring-fencing/coordination” tactic—into a pure wallet that has no interest and cannot provide rewards, thereby maintaining the banks’ absolute monopoly on cheap funds.
After grinding through the Senate for so long, if it passes smoothly today, it will be more enforceable and longer-lasting than the version in the House. That means it gets approval from the United States’ traditional financial power—i.e., the old money. If the banking coalition “steals the house,” it would collapse the valuation logic, turning CRCL from an internet-based new financial ecosystem back into a traditional remittance tool under tight regulation.
The main event is about to begin—this is a zero-sum game between new money seizing power and old money defending its wall.