Share
The sudden stall of the US Digital Asset Market Clarity Act has not rattled crypto markets. Some analysts say the pause may help them. The bill lost momentum after Coinbase pulled its support, citing provisions that could restrict decentralized finance and stablecoin use. Rather than seeing the delay as a failure, market analyst Michaël van de Poppe frames it as a reset that keeps harmful rules off the books.
The Clarity Act died.
This week, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong pulled his support on the Clarity Act Bill.
It might be impacting #Crypto in a negative way, but I think that this will have a huge positive outcome.
Why?
Watch the update here:https://t.co/e2JuXJpaGO
— Michaël van de Poppe (@CryptoMichNL) January 18, 2026
Coinbase’s decision landed days before a scheduled Senate discussion. CEO Brian Armstrong said the latest draft contained elements the industry could not accept. He flagged language that would block tokenized equities, widen government access to DeFi user records, and limit yield-bearing stablecoins. He argued that passing the bill as written would leave markets worse off than the status quo.
After reviewing the Senate Banking draft text over the last 48hrs, Coinbase unfortunately can’t support the bill as written.
There are too many issues, including:
– A defacto ban on tokenized equities
– DeFi prohibitions, giving the government unlimited access to your financial…— Brian Armstrong (@brian_armstrong) January 14, 2026
The reaction mattered because Coinbase has been one of the bill’s most visible backers. Its exit signaled that support among large market participants was thinner than lawmakers assumed.
Van de Poppe argues the stall removes near-term regulatory risk. In his view, markets feared a scenario where rigid rules became law and constrained on-chain finance for years. A delay avoids that outcome. He compares the moment to Europe’s Markets in Crypto-Assets framework, which went through repeated revisions before final passage in 2023. That process, he notes, produced clearer boundaries without freezing development.
For markets, the logic is straightforward. Uncertainty tied to ongoing talks is easier to price than binding rules that restrict core activity. Traders can adjust to debate. They struggle with laws that cut off entire segments, like tokenized securities or on-chain yield.
One flashpoint is stablecoin yield. Draft language would bar issuers from paying returns to passive holders, a move critics say protects banks rather than users. Venture capitalist Nic Carter warned that banning yield would set back stablecoins for years. That concern points to a broader issue. DeFi protocols compete with bank deposits on returns and access. Curtailing that competition reshapes the market by design.
Don’t let them kill stablecoin yield. That would set back stables for a generation. Hold the line
— nic carter (@nic_carter) January 17, 2026
Negotiations have not ended. Armstrong has said talks continue with lawmakers and the White House. The next version of the bill will test whether Congress can narrow its scope to market structure without reaching into product bans or data access.
In general, love your posts, but this is not accurate. The White House has been super constructive here.
They did ask us to see if we can go figure out a deal with the banks, which we're currently working on.
Actually, we've been cooking up some good ideas on how we can help… https://t.co/t1bK48oRc0
— Brian Armstrong (@brian_armstrong) January 17, 2026
For now, the stall keeps options open rather than forcing an immediate policy shock. Markets are spared the impact of rules that many participants viewed as premature, while lawmakers gain time to refine definitions and test where industry support actually holds. The bill’s fate is less about speed than substance, and whether a revised version can address the pressure points that fractured backing in the first place. Sometimes, progress starts with hitting pause.
Share
