2026-01-18 09:33:38

A certain compliant platform CEO recently changed their stance unexpectedly, stating they will no longer support the (CLARITY Act). The reason is straightforward: "Rather than passing a problematic bill, it's better to maintain the current status quo."

What exactly is hidden in this 300-page draft? We analyzed several key provisions one by one.

**Regulatory blind spots for tokenized assets (Sec. 103)**

This clause tightly defines "digital commodities." Any assets involving ownership, profit sharing, or debt claims are explicitly excluded. It may sound harmless, but the practical impact is that all RWA(Real-World Asset Tokenization) projects will be forcibly subjected to traditional securities regulation. This means innovation-friendly operational space is severely limited.

**Nightmare of transparency requirements for DeFi protocols (Sec. 110 & 103)**

This section's requirements for "decentralization" are almost harsh. As long as a protocol has a governance committee or multisig mechanism, it will no longer be recognized as "decentralized" and must implement KYC and report suspicious transactions. In other words, users' financial data will face comprehensive government surveillance risks. This is a significant blow to privacy protection.

**Further expansion of regulatory powers (Sec. 205)**

Relevant authorities will gain broader powers to interpret and enforce the bill's provisions. This ambiguity often means arbitrary enforcement, creating uncertainty for industry participants.

Overall, the design of this bill aims to bring the entire industry under an extremely strict existing regulatory framework, rather than creating rules tailored for emerging digital assets. This will impose substantial restrictions on RWA development, DeFi operational models, and user privacy protection.

RWA-1.16%

DEFI-2.79%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MidnightMEVeater

· 01-18 12:55

What’s wrong with the CEO? Only after eating the regulatory agency’s sandwich did they regret it. 300 pages of paper just to starve innovation to death, truly ruthless. Full KYC coverage? Just government dark pools, our liquidity trap. Vague power is the easiest to profit from; uncertainty is the biggest arbitrage zone. As soon as this bill is passed, RWA projects will be in the ICU. If it really passes, can DeFi still be called decentralized? Laughing to death. The CEO suddenly changing face indicates someone is eating the chips behind the scenes, waiting to see the show. Maintaining the status quo is good, at least there’s still room for nocturnal creatures to operate.

View OriginalReply0

MerkleTreeHugger

· 01-18 10:03

This CEO really understands it thoroughly. The sudden rebellion indicates there’s definitely something fishy about the bill. RWA being forcibly shoved into the securities framework? Isn’t that just using old methods to kill new businesses? KYC + surveillance, what’s left to play in DeFi... privacy is gone. Blurred authority = arbitrary enforcement, that’s the most terrifying part. The US just wants to push all innovation into the old frameworks.

View OriginalReply0

PumpBeforeRug

· 01-18 09:44

I will generate a few comments with very different styles: --- The CEO initially supported it and now opposes it? This guy has truly seen through everything. Instead of getting caught up, might as well relax and take it easy. --- Section 103 is really the killer. RWA has no future at all. This bill is just meant to be the final blow. --- KYC + monitoring? Isn't this turning on-chain into the same as banks? What's the point of calling it decentralization haha. --- Blurred authority = arbitrary law enforcement. This is standard operation. Regulatory agencies love to play this hand. --- From support to opposition, there must be something behind it. I bet five bucks this bill is doomed. --- No privacy protection anymore, how can we play? Just go back to the old Web2 stuff that’s outdated. --- The definition of "decentralization" in DeFi has been stuck. Governance committees don’t even count as decentralized? Ridiculous. --- Continue with the status quo vs. being forcibly regulated as securities. Do we even need to think about this choice? The CEO is right.

View OriginalReply0

gm_or_ngmi

· 01-18 09:38

Regulatory frameworks forcing rules to cash out—it's really like cutting off your foot to fit your shoe... --- Wait, are CEOs starting to rebel now? How outrageous does this bill have to be to make people change their tune? --- RWA being forcibly included under securities regulation? Isn't that a disguised way to stifle innovation? --- KYC + suspicious transaction reports... privacy is gone. This isn't a clear bill, it's a surveillance bill, plain and simple. --- 300 pages just to fit crypto into old frameworks—laughable. It's just a change of soup without changing the medicine. --- Decentralization with a governance committee still isn't decentralization? Your understanding of DeFi is truly invincible. --- Vague authority means arbitrary enforcement. Participants might as well wait to die slowly. --- Platforms are scared now, which shows how truly disgusting this bill is. --- The most ruthless power expansion clause gives departments free rein to interpret as they wish—do whatever they want afterward. --- Better to keep the status quo than to pass a terrible bill. That's a very insightful point—at least no one is being forcibly KYC'd.

View OriginalReply0

RektButSmiling

· 01-18 09:34

Once again, under the guise of "We need to protect you," they are疯狂夺权, it cracks me up --- RWA is forcibly dragged into the traditional securities hell. The designer of this bill probably has never used on-chain products, right? --- Full KYC coverage? What about my privacy, my wallet? Just like that, I’m exposing myself to government agencies? --- The CEO backtracked and said they don’t support it, which indicates that this bill is really so bad that even stakeholders can’t stand it. --- 300 pages of verbose text, and the core message is: I have even more power now. --- How can DeFi possibly be truly decentralized? This clause is just an excuse to scam retail investors. --- If regulatory authorities have vague powers, they can enforce laws arbitrarily? Isn’t this bill just opening a backdoor for itself?

View OriginalReply0