The negotiations for the CLARITY Act are still ongoing, and the battle over stablecoin yields is heating up. March 1 is not the final deadline.
February 28 News: The ongoing battle between the crypto industry and the banking sector over the core clause in the “CLARITY Act” regarding whether “interest-earning stablecoins” are permitted continues to intensify. Despite reports suggesting that negotiations are close to breaking down, multiple sources indicate that discussions are still ongoing, and March 1 is not the so-called “deadline.”
Eleanor Terrett disclosed on social media that representatives from crypto companies and banking institutions are still exchanging opinions on the bill’s text and are revising the language on stablecoin yield provisions word by word. She cited insiders who said that representatives from the American Bankers Association, the Independent Community Bankers of America, and the Bank Policy Institute, who attended a White House meeting last week, were surprised by reports of a “breakdown in negotiations” and have clarified their positions to the White House.
Previously, the White House aimed to finalize an agreement before March. Patrick Witt, Executive Director of the President’s Digital Asset Advisory Committee, was reportedly optimistic about completing negotiations by March. However, anonymous sources believe this timeline is overly optimistic, and a short-term resolution on the “U.S. stablecoin yield regulatory framework” is unlikely.
Supporters also voice their opinions. David Sacks publicly stated that Patrick Witt has made significant efforts to coordinate positions between banks and the crypto industry, noting that the crypto sector has already made concessions on yield issues, and calling for the banking industry to show more flexibility.
The current controversy centers on whether allowing “interest-earning stablecoins” could pose a competitive threat to the traditional deposit system. The crypto industry emphasizes that yield mechanisms can enhance the attractiveness of U.S. dollar stablecoins and strengthen America’s global competitiveness in digital assets.
Regarding the negotiation pace, both sides are still carefully reviewing the text, focusing on market structure and compliance details. Eleanor Terrett emphasized that March 1 is not a hard deadline, and the legislative process is more likely to depend on balancing interests rather than a calendar date.
Against the backdrop of the “2026 U.S. Stablecoin Regulatory Update,” the future of the “CLARITY Act” will directly impact stablecoin business models and the boundaries of the banking system. While short-term disagreements remain, communication channels for negotiations remain open.
Related Articles
Bitcoin Remains Resilient as Iran-US Conflict Fuels Risk-Off Sentiment
Geopolitical tensions drive crude oil to fluctuate at high levels, with Gate crude oil contracts reaching a 24-hour trading volume of $85.14 million.
Iranian cryptocurrency trading volume plummets 80%, geopolitical shocks severely impact the market
Why did Bitcoin decouple from Wall Street during the global conflict?
UK reviews cryptocurrency gambling payments to promote legal digital asset betting and consumer protection
Suspected US government tool leak! Google reveals new type of cryptocurrency scam iPhone attack chain