White House Targets July 4 for Clarity Act Passage

CryptoFrontier

The White House is targeting July 4, 2026 for House passage of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, according to Patrick Witt, executive director of the President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets. Speaking at Consensus Miami, Witt said the administration’s timeline calls for Senate Banking Committee markup in May, a Senate floor vote in June, and House passage before the July 4 deadline. “There’s not a lot of slack left in the rope right now. But it is an achievable timeline,” Witt said.

Stablecoin Compromise Breakthrough

The path to passage cleared significantly after Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) reached a compromise on stablecoin yield provisions on Friday. The agreement prohibits bank-deposit-equivalent yield while allowing activity-based rewards tied to spending. Witt framed the compromise as balanced: “Crypto is unhappy, banks are unhappy, but they’re both about equally unhappy. And so we know that we got the right compromise.”

Mixed Industry and Lawmaker Assessments

Industry leaders and lawmakers offered varying assessments of the timeline’s feasibility. Paul Grewal, Coinbase’s chief legal officer, stated that “I’m very confident we’re going to see the Clarity Act pass this summer at the latest,” adding, “I very much encourage the banking trade to not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott described the bill as being in the “red zone,” while Senator Kirsten Gillibrand offered a more cautious timeline, saying it could be completed by the first week of August “if we’re lucky.”

U.S. Leadership and Legislative Context

Witt framed the legislation as essential for maintaining U.S. leadership in digital assets, warning that “If we’re not setting the standard, if we’re not writing the rules, then we are going to be a rule follower, and we’re going to be following somebody else’s rulebook on this. And God forbid it’s China that’s ultimately writing those rules.”

The Clarity Act’s progress through Congress has been slow, with previous attempts foundering as crypto and banking interests failed to reach compromise on key issues. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse warned that the next two weeks are critical, noting that if Senate markup doesn’t happen soon, the likelihood of the bill passing “is going to drop precipitously” as midterm politics intensify.

Disclaimer: The information on this page may come from third parties and does not represent the views or opinions of Gate. The content displayed on this page is for reference only and does not constitute any financial, investment, or legal advice. Gate does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information and shall not be liable for any losses arising from the use of this information. Virtual asset investments carry high risks and are subject to significant price volatility. You may lose all of your invested principal. Please fully understand the relevant risks and make prudent decisions based on your own financial situation and risk tolerance. For details, please refer to Disclaimer.
Comment
0/400
EbbShellLedgervip
· 05-07 23:49
MARKET CLARITY ACT 喊了多久了,每次timeline都是election cycle,麻了
Reply0
MempoolNomadvip
· 05-07 12:17
Witt's comments at Consensus are clearly meant to boost industry morale, but getting it implemented before the 2026 midterms would be considered a win.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-744c843bvip
· 05-07 12:16
July 4th is chosen with a lot of symbolic meaning; celebrating crypto independence on Independence Day, the White House knows marketing.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-78aae297vip
· 05-07 05:30
Support! The crypto community lacks this kind of strict enforcement; relying solely on self-discipline is simply not reliable. Congress is stepping in to push everyone onto the right path.
View OriginalReply0
CheckingEthInTheElevatorvip
· 05-07 04:16
Gillibrand's move is ruthless, directly welding the moral threshold into legislation, see who still dares to fish in troubled waters.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-9568ced5vip
· 05-07 04:15
Ethical terms are the bottom line, no problem.
View OriginalReply0