After the Clarity Act got stuck, the U.S. suddenly delivered a “tax map” to the crypto industry.

On September 16, the U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means passed the (Digital Asset Taxation Certainty Act) (H.R.10357) by a vote of 38 in favor and 5 against. The next step is to submit it to the full House for consideration.

The timing is very interesting.

Less than 24 hours earlier, the Senate's push for a more comprehensive (Clarity Act) fell short: a procedural vote received only 50 votes in support, failing to reach the 60-vote threshold needed to move forward.

One regulatory bill got stuck, while another tax bill advanced quickly.

This points to an issue:

The U.S. stance toward the crypto industry isn’t simply a matter of “support” or “opposition.” Instead, it’s gradually stuffing Crypto into the existing financial system, one piece at a time.

### What exactly changed this time?

Simply put, in the past, many Crypto trades were hard to account for for tax purposes.

Buying coins, selling coins, transferring coins, paying Gas for transactions, mining, staking, broker reporting… many rules were either vague or simply applied the rules for traditional financial assets, making things difficult for both ordinary users and businesses.

This bill attempts to clarify these matters.

Among the things that ordinary crypto users are most likely to care about, the biggest are the issues of small transactions and transaction fees.

The bill sets a $10 threshold for small amounts and offers simplifications in the tax treatment for qualifying digital-asset network fees, trading fees, and so on. The goal is to reduce the flood of tax records created by on-chain actions costing just a few dollars or a few dozen dollars.

At the same time, the bill also addresses wash-sale rules, mining, staking, broker reporting, digital-asset lending, and more.

It looks very “tax-related,” but in reality it’s crucial for Crypto.

Because when an industry truly goes mainstream, it’s not just about an ETF being listed or institutions buying BTC.

More importantly, when ordinary people use it, can the legal and tax systems handle it?

### The biggest impact on the coin circle isn’t paying a bit less tax

A lot of people see the $10 threshold and first think:

“The U.S. just rolled out more good news.”

Actually, that’s not the point.

What’s truly important is that the U.S. is gradually shifting from “how to regulate Crypto” to “how to make Crypto run normally.”

These are two completely different stages.

One of Crypto’s biggest problems over the past few years has been uncertainty in the rules.

Exchanges don’t know how to comply; project teams don’t know what counts as a security; institutions don’t know how to get involved; and ordinary users also don’t know how to report taxes for any given on-chain activity.

Now, the U.S. is filling in the rules from different angles—market structure, stablecoins, taxation, broker reporting, digital-asset reporting, and so on.

Although (the Clarity Act) has currently hit a setback, the tax framework is still moving forward.

This means U.S. crypto regulation didn’t stop because one bill ran into trouble—it’s just being advanced in a different way.

### Second change: Crypto is becoming more and more like “financial infrastructure”

This may be even more worth attention than the tax part itself.

In the past, when we talked about Crypto, we mostly talked about:

BTC, ETH, MEME, DeFi, exchanges.

But now, the key words in U.S. policy discussions look more and more like traditional finance:

assets, brokers, reporting, capital gains, derivatives, stablecoins, payments, clearing.

Even wash-sale rules are starting to extend into digital assets.

The logic behind it is actually pretty simple:

As Crypto grows larger in scale, it can’t forever remain in a gray area as a “special asset.”

The House Ways and Means Committee’s own explanation is also very clear: this bill aims to bring the tax treatment of digital assets closer to that of traditional financial assets, while also addressing tax issues unique to digital assets.

So the real thing worth watching in the future may not be “whether the U.S. will accept Crypto.”

It’s:

in what way will Crypto be incorporated into the U.S. financial system?

### Third change: stablecoins may be one of the biggest beneficiaries

If Crypto becomes closer to normal financial infrastructure, the importance of stablecoins will keep rising.

Because BTC is more like an asset, while stablecoins are more like the “dollar interface” in the financial system.

For payments, transfers, trading, DeFi, RWA, and cross-border settlement—everything ultimately needs a stable unit of account.

And as tax rules start to establish clearer ways to handle digital-asset payments and transactions, it also reduces the friction for Crypto to enter real-economy scenarios.

That’s also why, in recent years, stablecoins, RWA, and tokenized stocks have attracted more and more institutional attention.

In the past, people discussed:

“Will the coin still go up?”

In the future, more and more institutions may discuss:

“How do these assets get put on-chain?”

This shift is more worth关注 than just a bull-and-bear cycle.

### But don’t interpret this as “a massive bull market is coming right away”

Here we need to pour a bucket of cold water.

Passing the bill through committee doesn’t mean it’s already law.

Next, it still needs to be reviewed by the full House and go through subsequent legislative procedures in the Senate, among others. Also, there’s limited remaining time for legislation in this U.S. congressional session, so whether the bill will ultimately be enacted remains uncertain.

So you can’t simply understand it as:

“U.S. brings good news, and BTC will launch immediately.”

The real impact may happen slowly.

The clearer the rules, the easier it is for institutions to enter;

the easier it is for institutions to enter, the more compliant products can appear;

the more compliant products there are, the lower the entry threshold for ordinary users;

and only then might a larger pool of on-chain capital form.

It’s a long chain of events.

### What does this mean for ordinary “retail investors”?

I think there are three things worth remembering.

First, Crypto is becoming more and more legitimate—but that doesn’t mean making money is getting easier.

Regulation solves the problem of whether the industry can develop long-term, not whether the MEME you buy can go up 100x.

Second, future opportunities may become increasingly concentrated in “Crypto + finance.”

BTC, stablecoins, RWA, tokenized stocks, on-chain derivatives, payments—these areas may be more worth long-term observation than just trading narratives.

Third, real industry tailwinds usually don’t happen on the day the policy is released.

Policy only lays out the road.

The truly big opportunities usually appear after infrastructure, capital, users, and applications start growing together.

So regarding this U.S. tax bill, I’m more inclined to see it as a signal:

Crypto is slowly shifting from “a new industry that needs regulation” to “a new market that needs to be written into financial rules.”

And the difference between these two identities is enormous.

In the past, we watched every day for which coin might get listed, which project might do an airdrop, and which MEME could potentially go 100x.

Next, we may need to switch perspectives:

Who is writing the rules? Who is providing the capital access? Who is moving traditional assets onto the chain?

Because the next round of truly large capital may not start from a MEME.

It’s more likely to begin with a new piece of financial infrastructure.

#BTC #ETH #Crypto