A bill aimed at outlining a clear future for the vast digital asset market in the U.S. (the cryptocurrency market structure bill) is now stuck at a seemingly minor, yet actually fatal, juncture — should stablecoins provide users with 'interest'?
Just today, Jason Somensatto, the policy director of the well-known cryptocurrency policy lobbying group Coin Center in Washington, revealed a crucial insight: "The issue of stablecoin yields is currently the 'main obstacle' to advancing the legislation. If this problem can be resolved, the remaining provisions can quickly lead to a handshake among everyone."
1. The deadly deadlock: The struggle between banks' 'rice bowls' and the industry's 'future'
The core of the controversy is unbelievably simple: should stablecoins be allowed to offer returns to their holders?
On one side is the traditional banking industry in the United States. Their logic is straightforward: if stablecoins can offer much higher returns than bank demand deposits, depositors' funds will flood from banks to crypto wallets. This is not only stealing their business, but also shaking the foundations of the nation—the core function of banks is to accept deposits and issue loans. If deposits are significantly diverted, the entire credit system may face the risk of contraction.
On the other hand, it is with
Coinbase
The crypto industry, represented by [name of company/entity], offered a similarly strong rebuttal: restricting returns is tantamount to stifling innovation. In global competition, if US dollar stablecoins cannot offer attractive returns, users and funds will flow to more regulated overseas markets.
This will not only weaken the global competitiveness of dollar-denominated stablecoins, but also constitute a self-imposed limitation on the future of US fintech.
Since the beginning of this year, the White House has repeatedly convened meetings between bankers and crypto executives in an attempt to find a middle ground. However, after several rounds of closed-door consultations, the result has been little consensus and the differences remain. The negotiations have reached a complete deadlock.
II. The Gray Area of "Third-Party Rewards": Is it a Regulatory Loophole or an Exit for Gambling?
We must turn our attention to a bill that has already been passed—the GENIUS Act.
This bill seems to offer an answer: it explicitly prohibits stablecoin "issuers" from paying interest directly to users.
The bill bans publishers but doesn't explicitly ban "third-party platforms." What does this mean? Like...
Exchanges like Coinbase, or decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols like Aave and Compound, can theoretically still provide rewards for users holding stablecoins.
They can design a variety of complex financial products, such as through "liquidity mining".
Mining allows users to stake stablecoins in exchange for platform tokens or a share of transaction fees, thus indirectly generating interest.
This "gray area" instantly became the focus of the entire game.
The banking industry believes this is a huge loophole that must be plugged, otherwise the ban will be ineffective.
The crypto industry sees this as a lifeline, believing it represents a delicate balance that legislators have found between strict risk control and encouraging innovation.
III. How great is the risk of the bill failing?
“If this drags on any longer, the bill may not even make it to the Senate committee vote stage.”
This is not an exaggeration. A glance at the congressional schedule reveals that the legislative process has been repeatedly delayed. The Senate Banking Committee's review, originally scheduled for the beginning of the year, has been postponed several times and still lacks a clear timetable. The lack of a hard deadline for a vote within Capitol Hill has made endless wrangling possible.
If the bill fails to pass or is delayed until after the 2026 midterm elections, the consequences will be disastrous. This means that regulatory uncertainty in the US crypto market will be prolonged once again.
IV. Trump's Entry: A Political "Ace in the Hole" from Outside the Game
Just when the deadlock in Washington seemed unsolvable, an unexpected variable emerged.
On March 27, at the FII (Future Investment Initiative) summit in Miami, President Trump explicitly called for "an outstanding law for stablecoins".