Stablecoins eye yield rules by March 1 CLARITY Act deadline

March 1, 2026 White House deadline steers CLARITY Act stablecoin rewards

The White House has set March 1, 2026 as the deadline to resolve the stablecoin rewards dispute and advance the CLARITY Act, as reported by CoinGape. The decision window is expected to determine which reward structures are permitted under federal law and which are prohibited.

At stake is how U.S. policy will treat incentives paid on stablecoins, with clarity needed for issuers, exchanges, and banks. The outcome could set compliance guardrails for retail programs and institutional products alike.

Why stablecoin yield rules matter to banks and crypto platforms

Banking trade groups warn that yield-like features on stablecoins could mimic deposit interest and draw funds away from community and regional banks; they also seek tight, enforceable definitions of what counts as yield, according to Stablecoin Insider. Their position emphasizes financial stability, deposit insurance frameworks, and a level competitive field with chartered institutions.

Crypto platforms, including Coinbase, counter that broad prohibitions on rewards would suppress consumer utility and slow innovation, news/2026/02/19/white-house-standoff-will-the-6-trillion-stablecoin-yield-war-kill-the-clarity-act-by-march-1/?utm_source=openai” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener”>as reported by FXLeaders. They argue incentives can be structured to promote compliant usage without replicating bank interest.

Negotiators say the remaining gaps are narrowing as legal text is refined. “A compromise can be reached by March 1, 2026, provided both sides engage in good faith,” said Patrick Witt, Executive Director of the President’s Council of Advisors on Digital Assets.

If a compromise passes, clearer rules could accelerate institutional participation and product development in the u.S., based on analysis by IA Journal. Defined boundaries may enable conservative rewards programs while preserving core banking functions.

If the deadline slips, the CLARITY Act could stall for an extended period, delaying stablecoin rulemaking and market certainty, as reported by Vixio. That would likely prolong fragmented approaches across intermediaries and financial institutions.

Global context suggests rising competitive pressure: the UK Financial Conduct Authority selected four companies to test stablecoin services under proposed regulations, according to News.Bitcoin.com. The U.S. decision may influence where firms pilot rewards programs and scale distribution. This article is informational and not investment advice.

Stablecoin rewards defined and stakeholder positions

Passive yield vs activity-based rewards: clear definitions

Negotiations distinguish “passive yield” as returns credited to an idle stablecoin balance, versus “activity-based rewards” tied to transactions, payments, or network participation, according to Crypto In America. The distinction centers on whether programs replicate deposit interest or reward usage.

Positions: Coinbase and ABA on stablecoin rewards

Positions have generally diverged. Coinbase favors room for compliant, innovation-supporting rewards, including activity-linked incentives. The American Bankers Association prioritizes strict limits on interest-like, passive features and clear definitions to prevent deposit displacement.

FAQ about CLARITY Act

Will the U.S. ban passive yield on stablecoins and only allow activity-based rewards?

Talks increasingly favor activity-based rewards over passive yield, but no final decision is public. Outcomes depend on the March 1 process and statutory text.

How would the stablecoin rewards decision impact exchanges, stablecoin issuers, and banks?

Exchanges may redesign rewards to tie them to usage. Issuers would align disclosures and controls. Banks could see stronger safeguards if passive yields are curtailed.