Senate Ag Delays Crypto Market Structure Markup to Late January

• The date of the structure markup in the crypto market by the Senate Agriculture Committee has been pushed to the last week of January.
• Negotiators have not agreed yet on matters related to the stablecoin yield ban and the code of ethics for public officers.
• The bill might also help clarify the SEC versus CFTC role, although political uncertainty remains over the timing.

The US Senate Agriculture Committee has deferred the date of their much-awaited markup on the big cryptocurrency market structure legislation to the last week of January as lawmakers rush to secure bipartisan support on bills affecting the regulation of cryptocurrencies in the US.

Committee on Appropriations Chairman John Boozman stated on Monday that he would like to proceed with a bill supported by both parties, but he requires additional time to finalize the remaining details. “We have indeed made progress and had constructive discussions as we look toward reaching this objective,” Boozman said. “Additional time is required before the bill proceeds to markup to finalize the remaining details and gain the support that this bill requires.”

Boozman went further to state that the committee would proceed to markup the last week of January, which pushed what had been planned for the current week.

Why this markup matters to crypto

Crypto industry leaders have closely watched the Senate process because the market structure bill would clarify how the U.S.’s top market regulators, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, divide authority over digital assets.

The CFTC, meanwhile, falls under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Committee and is preferred by many crypto companies as a regulator for “digital commodities” spot markets. The Senate Banking Committee has direct oversight of the SEC and intends to vote on its own markup this week-a vote that Boozman is now delaying, keeping Washington’s crypto calendar active.

Notably, however, is that the Senate Act does not reproduce the same elements of the House CLARITY Act that passed successfully in July of 2025. This is because Senate procedures prevented a direct adoption of the previous House bill.

Stablecoin yield and ethics rules remain sticking points

While lawmakers work to bridge gaps, several issues remain unresolved and continue to slow consensus.

The first major controversy appears with stablecoin yields. Bank trade groups have called on the legislative branch to prohibit third-party providers, including crypto exchanges, from providing yields on stablecoins. The groups have stated that these yields cloud the distinction between stablecoins and interest-bearing deposits, particularly with the GENIUS Act preventing stablecoin issuers from paying yields.

On the other hand, the Democratic senators have been advocating for strong ethics and conflict-of-interest measures to be included in the bill. This comes as they require rules that would restrict officials, as well as President Donald Trump, from gaining any benefit due to connections to crypto projects or companies.

The crypto industry associations are also actively campaigning to ensure that the legislation does not consider software developers and non-custodial wallets to be “intermediaries,” meaning that they would be forced to comply with obligations that apply to financial middlemen.

The 2026 timeline is still uncertain

However, despite the rising momentum, there are predictions from certain policymakers that the future is not that bright. An investment bank, TD Cowen, has advised that political factors, including the mid-term elections, could dampen support. This implies that the bill might not be passed until the year 2027, and its implementation would be in 2029.

However, in the short term, Boozman’s filibuster puts the spotlight on the fact that, in crypto regulation, lawmakers need clarity but also can’t agree on the scope of regulation or who should benefit most from those regulations.

Highlighted Crypto News:

UK Lawmakers Push to Ban Crypto Donations Over Transparency and Foreign Influence Risks