- Polymarket chances of passage slip below 50%.
- Bill must clear Senate committee by early May, experts warn.
- Failure to pass bill will be costly for crypto industry, says lawyer.
Pro-Clarity Act crypto lobbyists have redoubled their efforts to get the bill over the line in the weeks ahead, urging Senate Banking Committee members to approve the legislation “as soon as practicable” in an open letter.
Lawyers and punters think time may be running out for the bill. Crypto industry insiders this week gave the bill a 50-50 chance of passing before the year is out. Users of the Polymarket prediction market are even more pessimistic: just 45% back the bill to pass this year, with chances sliding 19% on Wednesday.
“We hope this letter helps move market structure legislation from discussion to action in the Senate Banking Committee, with a clear path to markup,” Lindsay Fraser, Chief Policy Officer at the Blockchain Association, told DL News. “From there, the objective is straightforward: advance a durable bipartisan framework through Congress and to the President’s desk.”
Experts have previously said if the bill doesn’t hit the Senate floor by May, its chances of passing this year could vanish completely. But while legal experts say the cost of Clarity’s potential failure would be high, they think all isn’t yet lost.
Stablecoin roadblock
“Our industry recognises the importance of this moment,” the lobbying groups Crypto Council for Innovation and Blockchain Association told Senators in the letter.
Senators still have some room for manoeuvre, say legal experts, even if time is not on lawmakers’ side.
“Lobbyists think a Senate committee hearing in May could keep the legislation viable, provided it manages to pass a final vote of the full Senate by July,” Yuliya Barabash, founder and managing partner at the law firm SBSB Fintech Lawyers, told DL News.
The legal community says the Senate’s Banking Committee is “unlikely” to debate the bill in April, Barabash added.
Earlier this week, Senator Thom Tillis reportedly backed a postponement until May, adding that negotiators need more time to find a compromise between banks and crypto firms.
Future-proofing crypto
The bill proposes enshrining a range of existing crypto-related guidelines into US law. Advocates say this will future-proof the crypto sector against crypto-sceptic future administrations.
Experts have previously warned of dire consequences if the bill does not pass, as banks, lawmakers, and crypto service providers continue to disagree about whether stablecoin holdings should pay their owners interest.
“If the bill does not pass this year, the next phase will likely be a combination of narrower interim measures, continued agency enforcement, court-driven precedent, and renewed legislative attempts after the midterms,” Elisenda Fabrega, general counsel at the law firm Brickken, told DL News.
“But that’s the slower and more expensive route. Clear statutory rules remain the most efficient path — both for markets and regulators.”
The fate of the war in the Middle East is starving the bill of political oxygen, Fabrega said.
“The legislative bottleneck is less about opposition to the bill itself and more about competing national priorities,” Fabrega said.
“Escalating geopolitical tensions, particularly around Iran, naturally consume political capital, floor time, and media attention,” Fabrega said. “When that happens, even strategically important economic legislation can be delayed if it is not treated as urgent.”
Losing heart
Crypto industry insiders are beginning to lose heart and are dismayed by Tillis’ statement.
Any further delays “contract the timeline and marginally reduce the likelihood of eventual passage in 2026,” Alex Thorn, head of research at the asset manager Galaxy Digital, said in comments shared with DL News.
“It puts additional pressure on Senators to move a complicated bill inside a Senate schedule already loaded with competing priorities,” Thorn said. “Every week of delay compresses the window for the sequential steps required to reach the President’s desk.”
Thorn concluded that a committee debate in May would not be “fatal to the bill’s prospects,” provided the markup takes place early in the month.
Tim Alper is a News Correspondent at DL News. Got a tip? Email him at tdalper@dlnews.com.
