U.S. Senator Thom Tillis is pushing to move the long‑debated CLARITY Act into the Senate Banking Committee’s markup stage after the upcoming congressional recess, saying there is “significant consensus” and urging a hearing be scheduled soon. He told colleagues he will publish updated legislative text on stablecoin yield “four to five days” before the hearing so industry and other stakeholders can review it in advance.
Tillis said recent negotiations have addressed “most concerns from the banking sector regarding the risks associated with stablecoin yield” and called on institutions with remaining objections to “participate in good faith to improve the legislation.” Banks and crypto firms have clashed behind the scenes over whether paying yield on stablecoin balances should be tightly constrained or permitted under conditions — a dispute that previously delayed markup. Draft compromise language circulated by Tillis would bar digital asset providers from offering yield “directly or indirectly on stablecoin balances” in ways economically equivalent to bank interest, while allowing narrowly defined activity‑based rewards tied to payments or platform use.
Tillis also said he “generally supports” Senator Cynthia Lummis’ framework on protecting non‑custodial crypto developers from being swept up by 1960‑era criminal laws, specifically concerns about the broad application of 18 U.S.C. § 1960. Lummis and allies have argued that non‑controlling developers — those who write or update open‑source blockchain software without taking custody of user funds — should not be treated as money transmitters. A February proposal described by observers would codify that distinction so only entities with actual control over customer assets face licensing and criminal exposure.
Taken together, Tillis’s comments signal progress on two central questions for U.S. crypto policy: which kinds of stablecoin rewards will be permitted, and where the line will be drawn between protocol developers and intermediaries that handle money. Market participants have warned unresolved U.S. rules around yields and custody are already affecting product design, and regulatory clarity could help bridge gaps between on‑chain signals and institutional participation in assets such as Bitcoin.