Coinbase chief legal officer Paul Grewal said the US Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act is “moving toward” a markup hearing in the Senate Banking Committee and could advance to a floor vote if senators resolve disagreements over stablecoin yield and schedule the markup. Grewal made the remarks in an interview with Fox Business, saying lawmakers are close to agreeing on the bill’s main terms even as debate persists on the limited issue of yield.
A central sticking point in Senate negotiations is whether stablecoin issuers or trading platforms should be permitted to offer yield or similar incentives. That disagreement has delayed a planned Senate Banking Committee markup and left the broader effort to create a federal digital-asset framework unresolved.
US banks have urged restrictions on such rewards, arguing that attractive yield programs could siphon deposits away from traditional institutions and destabilize the banking system. Grewal disputed those concerns, saying there is no evidence of deposit flight tied to stablecoin incentives. “I think we’re very close to a deal,” he added.
The House passed the CLARITY Act on July 17, 2025. In January, Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott postponed a scheduled markup; no new date has been set.
Last month, former President Donald Trump accused banks of blocking progress on the bill over disagreements related to stablecoin yield. It was later reported that Trump met privately with Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong hours before issuing that statement. In January, Armstrong said Coinbase could not support the market-structure bill “as written,” citing draft amendments that would eliminate stablecoin rewards and give banks the power to curtail competition.
Coinbase’s stock is down about 23% year-to-date. Coin Center executive director Peter Van Valkenburgh warned that failing to pass the CLARITY Act could leave the crypto industry exposed to harsher regulation under a future administration, arguing that forgoing developer protections to preserve short-term business advantages risks producing rules driven by political change rather than clear statutory law. “The point of passing CLARITY is not to trust this administration. It is to bind the next one,” he said.
