Bill status checked against congress.gov on 18 October 2026: last recorded action is the failed cloture vote of 15 September 2026.
The CLARITY Act is a US bill that would write the rules for crypto markets into federal law: which regulator oversees which tokens, how exchanges and brokers register, and what protections ordinary holders and software developers get. It is not law. The House passed it 294–134 on 17 July 2025; on 15 September 2026 the Senate fell 11 votes short of even starting debate — 49 in favour, 50 against, with 60 needed. As of 18 October 2026, nothing has happened since.
That is the short answer. The longer one matters because two different texts now carry the CLARITY name, and most summaries describe only one of them. This note reads both, and keeps the parts that would reach you apart from the parts that only reach firms.
What the CLARITY Act Does, in Five Points
The official title is the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, H.R. 3633 in the 119th Congress. Read against the House text, it does five things:
- Splits the regulators. Tokens tied to a blockchain’s use — “digital commodities” — go mainly to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC); fundraising that looks like selling securities stays with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
- Registers the middlemen. Exchanges, brokers and dealers that handle digital commodities would register with the CFTC (House text, Title IV, Secs. 404 and 406) under a new set of rules for qualified digital asset custodians (Sec. 405).
- Defines when a network is “mature.” A blockchain counts as mature when it “is not controlled by any person or group of persons under common control.” Projects get a route to raise money while they get there: up to $50,000,000 in any 12 months, with a four-year horizon to reach maturity (Sec. 202).
- Protects self-custody and builders. A US individual keeps the right, for personal use, to hold crypto in their own hardware or software wallet and to transact peer-to-peer (Sec. 105(c)); developers who do not control a network get a separate carve-out (Sec. 109).
- Bans a Federal Reserve retail CBDC. Title VI, the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act, rides along in the House version.
CLARITY Act vs GENIUS Act: Which One Is Already Law?
People search the two together because they arrived together. The House took up the GENIUS Act and CLARITY under the same rule in July 2025, but only GENIUS became law.
The GENIUS Act is narrow: it covers payment stablecoins only. It was signed on 18 July 2025 as Public Law 119-27. It licenses issuers and contains a flat ban on issuers paying holders:
“No permitted payment stablecoin issuer or foreign payment stablecoin issuer shall pay the holder of any payment stablecoin any form of interest or yield (whether in cash, tokens, or other consideration) solely in connection with the holding, use, or retention of such payment stablecoin.”
— GENIUS Act, Sec. 4(a)(11), govinfo.gov
GENIUS takes effect on the earlier of 18 months after enactment (18 January 2027) or 120 days after regulators issue final rules (Sec. 20).
CLARITY is the broad bill — everything that is not a payment stablecoin. It leans on GENIUS rather than replacing it: both CLARITY texts take their definition of “payment stablecoin” straight from GENIUS. The fight that sank CLARITY in September was partly about closing a gap GENIUS left open. GENIUS bans issuers from paying interest; it does not stop an exchange from paying “rewards” on a stablecoin balance. The Senate text tried to close that gap, and the banking and crypto industries have been fighting over it ever since.
Two Texts, One Name: House Version vs Senate Version
This is the part most summaries skip. The bill the Senate tried to take up in September 2026 is still numbered H.R. 3633, but the Senate Banking Committee replaced everything after the enacting clause with its own text — a substitute that runs to nine titles and calls its first title the “Lummis-Gillibrand Responsible Financial Innovation Act of 2026.” The CFTC side of the Senate effort sits in a separate bill, the Agriculture Committee’s Digital Commodity Intermediaries Act, S. 3755.
| Question | House version (passed 17 July 2025) | Senate Banking substitute (reported 1 June 2026) |
|---|---|---|
| Structure | 6 titles; CFTC registration regime is inside the bill (Title IV) | 9 titles; CFTC regime left to the Agriculture Committee’s S. 3755 |
| Token test | “Mature blockchain system” + up to $50 million per 12 months in exempt sales (Sec. 202) | “Ancillary asset” disclosure and exemption regime (Title I, Secs. 102–103) |
| Stablecoin rewards | No exchange-level ban | Interest or yield on stablecoin balances banned for exchanges and their affiliates; activity-based rewards allowed (Sec. 404) |
| Self-custody | Any US individual, for personal use: right to hold in own wallet and trade peer-to-peer (Sec. 105(c)) | “Keep Your Coins Act”: federal agencies may not restrict self-custody for lawful purposes — but only for a narrower “covered user” (Sec. 605) |
| Developers | Carve-out for non-controlling developers (Sec. 109) | “Protecting software developers” + Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (Secs. 601, 604) |
| DeFi | Exclusion for decentralized finance activities (Secs. 309, 409) | Rulemaking on which trading protocols are not decentralized (Title III) |
| Customer property in bankruptcy | Not a separate title | Separate title (Title VII, Secs. 701–702) |
| Retail CBDC ban | Yes (Title VI) | No anti-CBDC title in the table of contents |
| When it would start | Titles II and III: 360 days after enactment, or 60 days after a final rule if later (Secs. 206, 313); CFTC title: 270 days (Sec. 414) | Whole Act: 360 days after enactment, or 60 days after a final rule if later (Sec. 906) |
My read: the two versions agree on the architecture — two regulators, registered intermediaries, protected self-custody — and disagree on the details that move money, above all whether a crypto platform can pay you for holding a stablecoin. That is the fault line to watch if the bill comes back.
Who CLARITY Would Change Things For
The table below is the practical version: what each group would face if the Senate text, the most recent version, became law. Each row cites the section that does it.
| If you are… | What would change | Where it is in the text |
|---|---|---|
| A US crypto exchange or broker | Registration with a federal regulator; customer assets held apart; no paying “interest” on stablecoin balances | House Title IV; Senate Secs. 404, 701 |
| A token project raising money | Disclosure-based exemption instead of case-by-case securities treatment | Senate Title I (Secs. 102–103); House Sec. 202 |
| A developer or node operator | Not treated as a broker or exchange just for writing code or running infrastructure | Senate Secs. 601, 604; House Sec. 109 |
| A bank | Clearer permission to custody and handle digital assets | Senate Title IV (Sec. 401); House Sec. 310 |
| An individual US holder | A statutory self-custody protection (broad in the House text, limited to a defined “covered user” in the Senate text); stablecoin “rewards” limited to activity-based ones | Senate Secs. 404, 605; House Sec. 105(c) |
| A holder outside the US | No direct effect; indirect effect through which US platforms and stablecoins can serve you | — |
The self-custody clause is the line that reaches ordinary people most directly. In the Senate text:
“A Federal agency may not prohibit, restrict, or otherwise impair the ability of a covered user to self-custody digital assets using a self-hosted wallet or other means to conduct transactions for any lawful purpose.”
— Senate Banking substitute, Sec. 605(c), govinfo.gov
Who counts as a “covered user” matters. Sec. 605(b)(1) defines it as “a United States individual who obtains digital assets to purchase goods or services on behalf of that individual” — narrower than “anyone who holds crypto.” The House version is broader: Sec. 105(c) says “a United States individual shall retain the right” to keep a hardware or software wallet for their own lawful custody and to transact peer-to-peer, limited to personal use. The same Senate section keeps the government’s anti-money-laundering and sanctions powers intact, so either way this is a protection for lawful use, not an exemption from enforcement.
Where the CLARITY Act Stands (Timeline)
| Date | What happened |
|---|---|
| 29 May 2025 | Introduced in the House |
| 17 July 2025 | Passed the House, 294–134 |
| 18 July 2025 | GENIUS Act signed (Public Law 119-27) — the stablecoin piece became law separately |
| 18 Sept 2025 | Received in the Senate, referred to the Banking Committee |
| 29 Jan 2026 | Senate Agriculture Committee advances its CFTC bill, S. 3755, 12–11 (ABA Banking Journal) |
| 23 Mar 2026 | Joint SEC/CFTC interpretation on crypto asset classes takes effect (sec.gov) |
| 14 May 2026 | Senate Banking orders its substitute reported, 15–9 (Cointelegraph) |
| 1 June 2026 | Substitute formally reported; placed on the Senate calendar (No. 423) |
| 8 Aug 2026 | Motion to proceed and cloture motion filed |
| 15 Sept 2026 | Cloture on the motion to proceed fails, 49–50; Sen. Tillis enters a motion to reconsider |
| 18 Oct 2026 | No further action recorded |
Two procedural facts decide what happens next. First, the motion to reconsider means the Senate can hold the same vote again without starting from scratch. Second, the 119th Congress ends in early January 2027; a bill that has not passed both chambers by then dies and must be reintroduced. US midterm elections fall on 3 November 2026, which leaves a short post-election session as the realistic window.
Why It Stalled
The vote was procedural: no senator voted on the bill’s substance, because the Senate never agreed to begin. Orrick’s October 2026 analysis names two sticking points — ethics provisions covering federal officials’ crypto holdings, and stablecoin yield, where banks worry that interest-like rewards on stablecoins would pull deposits away from them. The committee votes already showed the strain: the Agriculture Committee’s piece passed on party lines, and the Banking Committee’s passed with two Democratic votes.
What practitioners get wrong in casual coverage is treating “stalled” as “nothing changes.” US crypto rules are moving anyway, through the agencies. The SEC and CFTC issued a joint interpretation that sorts crypto assets into five categories — “digital commodities; digital collectibles; digital tools; stablecoins; and digital securities” — effective 23 March 2026 (sec.gov). On 18 August 2026 the SEC proposed “Regulation Crypto Assets,” with one exemption for offerings of up to $5 million over four years and another for up to $75 million in each 12-month period (sec.gov). Agency rules can be rewritten by the next agency; a statute is harder to undo. That durability is what CLARITY would add.
What This Means If You Hold Crypto
- Nothing changes in your account because of CLARITY today. It is a bill. Any platform telling you it “complies with CLARITY” is describing a law that does not exist yet.
- Stablecoin rewards are the live question. If you earn a “reward” on a stablecoin balance at a US platform, that product is exactly what the Senate text would limit. Check whether your platform’s terms describe the reward as tied to holding or to activity — that is the distinction Sec. 404 draws.
- Self-custody is not currently threatened by CLARITY; it would be protected by it. Both versions write a self-custody protection into law, but with different reach: the House text covers any US individual for personal use, the Senate text a defined “covered user” who acquires crypto to buy goods or services.
- Your tax reporting is a separate track. CLARITY does not change how crypto is taxed. The form that does change things for US holders is the broker statement — see what Form 1099-DA is and how to read it.
- If you are outside the US, the comparison point is your own regime. In Europe that is MiCA; for how MiCA does and does not reach a non-EU country like Switzerland, see does MiCA apply in Switzerland, and for the rules-based-versus-principles-based contrast, the MiCA vs FINMA field note.
The next step that costs nothing: bookmark the congress.gov action page for H.R. 3633. Any revival will show up there first as a new floor action.
What to Track Next
- A second cloture vote in the post-election session — the motion to reconsider makes it procedurally simple.
- Whether the stablecoin-yield language changes. Sec. 404 is the trade the bill’s fate turns on; a reworded version would be the signal that a deal is close.
- GENIUS Act rules before 18 January 2027. Stablecoin licensing goes live on its own clock, CLARITY or not. For how a non-US banking system is approaching the same instrument, see the Swiss franc stablecoin sandbox.
- The SEC’s Regulation Crypto Assets moving from proposal to final rule — the agency route to some of what CLARITY would have done.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the CLARITY Act in simple terms?
It is a US bill, H.R. 3633, that would decide which regulator oversees which crypto assets (the CFTC for digital commodities, the SEC for securities-like offerings), require exchanges and brokers to register, and protect people’s right to hold crypto in their own wallets (how broadly differs between the House and Senate texts). It passed the House in July 2025 but is not law.
Did the CLARITY Act pass?
No. It passed the House 294–134 on 17 July 2025. In the Senate, a procedural vote to begin debate failed 49–50 on 15 September 2026. As of 18 October 2026, congress.gov shows no further action.
What is the difference between the CLARITY Act and the GENIUS Act?
GENIUS covers payment stablecoins only and is already law (Public Law 119-27, signed 18 July 2025). CLARITY covers the rest of the crypto market — exchanges, brokers, token offerings, developers — and is still a bill. CLARITY relies on GENIUS’s stablecoin definitions.
Does the CLARITY Act ban stablecoin interest?
The Senate Banking version would bar crypto platforms and their affiliates from paying US customers interest or yield for simply holding a stablecoin, while allowing rewards tied to genuine activity (Sec. 404). The GENIUS Act already bans issuers from paying interest. The House version has no platform-level ban.
When would the CLARITY Act take effect if it passed?
Under the Senate text, 360 days after enactment, or 60 days after the implementing rule is published if that is later (Sec. 906). The House text uses the same 360-days-or-60-days-after-the-rule formula for its token-offering and SEC titles (Secs. 206, 313) and a flat 270 days for its CFTC title (Sec. 414).
What I Take Away
The CLARITY Act is less a single bill than a negotiation with a bill number. The House wrote a CFTC-centred market-structure law; the Senate rewrote it around securities disclosure, illicit finance and a stablecoin-yield compromise, and still could not get 60 votes to begin. For a reader trying to understand US crypto rules in late 2026, the honest summary is that the architecture is broadly agreed, the money questions are not, and the agencies are building an interim version while Congress decides.
This is a field note, not investment advice or legal advice. Bill status current as of 18 October 2026; check congress.gov and qualified counsel before acting on any of it.