The Senate Banking Committee will meet on Thursday, May 14, to consider the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025, putting the crypto market structure bill back on the calendar after a postponement in January.
The announcement follows months of conversations about regulatory jurisdiction, consumer protections, developer protections and stablecoin rewards. CoinDesk reported last week that crypto firms had supported a compromise with the stablecoin dividend that would unlock the bill.
Cody Carbone, CEO of The Digital Chamber, said the announcement marks “a big step” toward clarity for the more than 70 million Americans who use cryptocurrencies.
Blockchain Association CEO Summer Mersinger called the markup announcement “an important step toward establishing clear rules for digital asset markets.”
“This work reflects months of serious engagement on difficult issues, from SEC-CFTC jurisdiction to consumer protection and developer protection,” Mersinger said. “Clear statutes are what American consumers, businesses and innovators deserve.”
Kristin Smith, president of the Solana Policy Institute, called the markup “a make or break moment for American leadership in financial markets.” Miller Whitehouse-Levine, the group’s chief executive, said the date is “the first step” towards giving developers and financial institutions certainty to build onchain in the US
Ji Hun Kim, CEO of the Crypto Council for Innovation, said “the momentum is real and the time is now.” The markup, he said, brings the United States closer to a framework that protects consumers, provides investors with clear information, protects developers and supports responsible innovation.
The markup gives Senate Banking another chance to move the bill ahead of the White House’s July 4 target for passage of the Clarity Act.
Although the crypto industry is cheering the hearing date, the banking industry said it still has concerns.
A joint letter to Senate Banking Committee Chairs Tim Scott and Elizabeth Warren from a coalition of banking associations said they still had some concerns with the bill, suggesting changes to the text of the legislation.
