Headline: Coinbase says Senate is “very close” to resolving stablecoin showdown in CLARITY Act — deal could come this week Coinbase’s chief legal officer, Paul Grewal, told Fox Business this week that negotiators in the Senate are “very close” to a deal on the CLARITY Act’s most contentious issue: stablecoin yields. Grewal said the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act is “moving toward” a markup in the Senate Banking Committee and suggested the long‑running dispute over whether and how exchanges can pay yield on stablecoin balances could be resolved as soon as Friday. Why stablecoins are the sticking point The core fight pits banks against crypto firms. Banks fear that attractive yields on stablecoins would trigger deposit flight; exchanges argue yield‑bearing stablecoins are central to product offerings and user growth. That tension is the reason CLARITY’s stablecoin language has repeatedly delayed committee progress and led to canceled markups. What the emerging compromise looks like Sources and participants in the talks are reportedly converging on a middle ground: ban rewards for idle, “parked” stablecoin balances while permitting limited yields tied to active, transaction‑linked use — for example, spending or on‑chain transactions. According to reporting, some big banks, including JPMorgan and CEO Jamie Dimon, appear willing to accept such a framework. Why this matters now If the Senate Banking Committee schedules and approves a markup this month, the bill could move to a full Senate floor vote and — if passed — reach President Trump’s desk later this year. Supporters say passing the CLARITY Act would replace years of “regulation by enforcement” under the SEC with a clear federal framework. CFTC Chair Michael S. Piwowar — correction: Michael S. Selig — has likewise touted the pending market‑structure bill as a way for the U.S. to become the “gold standard” for digital‑asset rules. Lingering concerns Even with a compromise on stablecoin yields, many builders and power users fear the law could entrench a bank‑and exchange‑centric model. Critics say CLARITY risks sidelining DeFi, tokenized markets, and non‑custodial self‑custody by assigning licensing regimes and regulatory boundaries that favor bigger, custodial players — a worry emphasized in recent Reuters coverage of the bill. A rocky road so far The talks follow months of drama: Coinbase withdrew support for an earlier markup, arguing certain provisions amounted to a “de facto ban” on tokenized equities, imposed heavy DeFi restrictions, and shifted authority toward the SEC. That decision derailed a prior markup and increased scrutiny of the bill’s language. What to watch next - Whether the Senate Banking Committee formally calendars the markup and how the final stablecoin yield language is written. - Market response: a managed compromise could stabilize onshore liquidity and exchange business models; failure could prompt some re‑pricing of U.S. regulatory risk and a rotation of activity offshore. - How tokenization, DeFi, and custody provisions are resolved — these will determine whether CLARITY becomes a broad enabling framework or a narrower, institution‑centric regime. Cover image: Perplexity. BTCUSDT chart: TradingView. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news