The White House Says Banks Got What They Asked For. The CLARITY Act Still Has One Week to Survive

The CLARITY Act has reached the point where every remaining day counts.

Senators Thom Tillis and Ruben Gallego have reportedly finished a bipartisan compromise on the bill’s government-ethics language.

That was supposed to be one of the hardest pieces left on the table.

Now the White House is publicly asking why the banking industry is still trying to move another piece.

Patrick Witt, President Trump’s top crypto adviser, says negotiators already gave banks the protection they demanded against interest-bearing stablecoins.

The banks are still lobbying for broader restrictions on rewards and incentives that they believe could compete with deposits.

Witt’s frustration is now out in the open.

NEW: White House crypto adviser @patrickjwitt calls out the banking industry for continuing to oppose the CLARITY Act, even though it already bans interest-bearing stablecoins, a provision banks had demanded. pic.twitter.com/xL30bxc2cW

— CoinDesk (@CoinDesk) July 30, 2026

The argument reaches far beyond one fight over stablecoin rewards.

CLARITY would divide digital-asset oversight between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. It would also create federal rules for exchanges, brokers, token projects and decentralized-finance developers that have spent years operating under enforcement risk and agency uncertainty.

That rulebook is the reason this bill has carried so much weight for the American crypto industry.

The United States has already spent years watching builders, trading firms and capital move toward jurisdictions willing to write clear laws. CLARITY is Congress’s best chance to reverse that pattern before another election reshuffles the negotiating table.

CoinDesk says Tillis, a Republican, and Gallego, a Democrat, were asked to bridge the divide over limits on crypto interests held by senior government officials. The pair has reportedly completed new language, although the text has not yet been made public.

It still needs approval from the White House and enough Democratic support to help the bill reach 60 votes in the Senate.

The unresolved language would restrict direct crypto ties involving senior officials, an issue Democrats have centered on President Trump’s business interests. The White House had already accepted a narrower ethics provision, but opponents said it would not create meaningful enforcement.

Tillis and Gallego were brought in after that version failed to secure the needed support. Their compromise could unlock the remaining negotiations over decentralized finance, illicit-finance safeguards and stablecoin rewards.

The timing is brutal.

Only seven days remain before senators leave for the August recess. A disputed Senate bill normally needs several procedural steps, waiting periods and up to 30 hours of debate after cloture.

Majority Leader John Thune is already managing floor time for nominations and Russia sanctions legislation. CLARITY cannot simply cut to the front without a deal and the votes to keep it moving.

The ethics compromise gives the bill a possible opening.

It does not give the Senate more hours.

UPDATE: Senators Tillis and Gallego have finalized a new bipartisan ethics compromise for the CLARITY Act per sources, though details haven't emerged and White House approval is still needed.

The window is closing: seven days until Senate recess, and 60 votes still unconfirmed. pic.twitter.com/IFZdLoJC4I

— CoinDesk (@CoinDesk) July 30, 2026

Stablecoin rewards remain the other stubborn fault line.

Banks worry that crypto companies can offer customers rewards that function like interest and pull deposits out of the banking system. Negotiators responded with language designed to stop stablecoin issuers from paying interest simply for holding a token.

The American Bankers Association wants the restriction extended to rewards, incentives and arrangements it considers substantially similar to interest.

That broader language could sweep in loyalty programs, payment incentives and activity-based rewards that are common across crypto platforms.

The White House believes the industry has already compromised.

Witt’s message is that banks asked Congress to stop interest-bearing stablecoins, got that concession and returned with a larger demand.

For crypto companies, the distinction is enormous. A narrow ban separates passive interest from rewards tied to payments or platform use.

A broader ban could let bank lobbyists constrain products that compete with them even when those products do not resemble a savings account.

That is a policy choice Congress should make openly, rather than burying it inside a last-minute definition.

CoinDesk puts the cost of delay in market terms through JPMorgan’s latest analysis, which treats the legislation as a major catalyst for regulated American crypto growth. Prediction markets had reduced the bill’s chance of passing this year to 37%.

The bank warned that continued delay could allow tokenization and blockchain applications to be absorbed by incumbent financial infrastructure instead of building value on public crypto networks.

Its concern is that traditional firms can build private tokenization systems while public networks remain trapped in regulatory uncertainty. In that outcome, blockchain adoption grows, but open crypto markets capture less of the value.

JPMorgan also identified the upside of a federal framework: more confidence for banks, brokers, custodians, exchanges and asset managers to launch products inside the United States.

The bank is hardly a disinterested crypto cheerleader. Its analysts also warned that weak anti-money-laundering rules or lightly supervised tokenized markets could discourage serious institutions.

The report pointed to Citadel Securities’ $400 million investment in Crypto.com and the CFTC’s approval of regulated perpetual crypto futures as evidence that institutional infrastructure is advancing even before the bill passes. CLARITY would give those firms a clearer federal lane for expanding that work.

That tension is exactly why Congress needs a durable law.

Federal agencies can write guidance and grant exemptions, but those policies can change with a new chair or a new administration. A statute gives market participants a foundation that survives personnel changes.

The Senate still has a route, although it is narrow.

Thune could begin the cloture process before recess, giving the bill procedural momentum even if final passage slips into September. Negotiators could circulate the Tillis-Gallego text quickly, secure White House approval and force senators to decide whether the remaining disagreements are worth killing the entire framework.

If they wait until September to restart from zero, the calendar gets worse. Congress will also face spending deadlines and members will be looking toward the November elections.

A failed September push could leave CLARITY stranded until a lame-duck session or force the next Congress to rebuild the deal.

The crypto industry has already conceded limits on stablecoin interest. President Trump accepted ethics restrictions aimed directly at officials with digital-asset interests. A Republican and a Democrat have reportedly finished tougher compromise language.

The final obstacle may be whether senators are willing to stop adding demands long enough to vote.

Seven days is enough time to start.

It is no longer enough time to keep moving the goalposts.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.