In this second February edition of crypto regulatory affairs, we will cover:
White House and Congress continue to push for Clarity Act passage
Over the past two weeks, US policymakers have been working to keep draft market structure legislation on track for passage ahead of midterm elections in November.
On February 10, the White House convened a second meeting of banking and cryptoasset industry representatives aimed at resolving a disagreement over proposals to prohibit exchanges and other platforms from offering interest and other rewards on stablecoins.
Patrick Witt, the Executive Director of the President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets, hosted the meeting to build on discussions held at the White House on February 2.
The stablecoin interest debate has become a contentious issue that threatens to derail the Clarity Act, cryptoasset market structure legislation that passed the US House of Representatives in July 2025 and is undergoing debate in the Senate.
In mid-January, the Senate Banking Committee was scheduled to hold a markup session on the bill but indefinitely postponed it in response to industry pushback on an amendment related to stablecoin interest payments.
The dispute relates to a proposal from the banking industry to close what it sees as a loophole in the GENIUS Act, legislation that sets out rules on stablecoins that became law last year.
Under the GENIUS Act, stablecoin issuers may not pay interest on holders’ balances. However, the GENIUS Act does not explicitly prevent other market intermediaries, such as cryptoasset exchanges and other platforms that distribute stablecoins, from offering users interest or other rewards on their holdings.
The banking sector has argued that this omission runs counter to the GENIUS Act’s objective of regulating stablecoins as payment instruments, and that the law’s prohibition on issuer interest payments was intended to ensure that stablecoins would not become the functional equivalent of savings accounts without the same regulatory protections.
The banking industry has also warned that community banks especially could see depositors withdraw funds at scale if cryptoasset exchanges can offer interest on stablecoin holdings, which would in turn restrict lending and harm the broader economy.
The draft CLARITY Act that the Senate Banking Committee was due to debate in mid-January contained an amendment that would have imposed a broad prohibition on paying stablecoin interest and strictly limited the offer of similar rewards.
The cryptoasset industry protested its inclusion, arguing that the GENIUS Act deliberately excluded exchanges from the ban on issuer interest payments, accusing the banking sector of attempting to stifle competition. The Senate Banking Committee canceled its planned session after Coinbase threatened to withdraw support for the bill if the amendment remained, raising concerns that the Clarity Act might fail to pass Congress before elections, potentially jeopardizing its future altogether.
The two White House meetings in early February were designed to break the impasse. Reports suggest that no compromise was reached at either meeting, though at the February 10 session banking sector representatives shared a document indicating that they remain committed to a ban on stablecoin interest payments, and that other types of rewards should only be permitted in very limited circumstances.
The White House has not confirmed whether it will hold a follow-up meeting, but has urged both industries to find a compromise before March 1 so that the Senate Banking Committee can resume its work on the bill.
Despite the lack of clear progress, representatives from both industries have spoken positively about the discussions and indicated that they remain committed to further dialogue. Policymakers in the White House and Congress have continued to express optimism about the Clarity Act’s prospects, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune has reportedly promised to schedule time for the full Senate to debate the bill this spring should it emerge from committee.
The Senate Agriculture Committee has passed its own version of the legislation. While that version did not receive support from any Democratic senators, reporting indicates that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is eager to see it pass.
The Clarity Act is a key pillar of President Donald Trump’s strategy to establish US leadership in digital assets by creating a regulatory framework with clear boundaries and definitions that would give market participants greater confidence to innovate over the long term.
While failure to pass the Act in the coming months would be a significant setback, the direction of travel for US policy on cryptoassets is toward giving market participants greater regulatory clarity and ensuring that regulation serves as a booster, not just a blocker, to innovation.
CFTC updates stablecoin definition to include national trust banks
The CFTC has updated a staff policy document to reflect that national trust banks can act as permitted stablecoin issuers, even in advance of the GENIUS Act’s implementation.
On February 6, the CFTC’s Markets Participants Division reissued Staff Letter 25-40, which relates to a decision indicating that in certain limited circumstances the CFTC will not take enforcement action against futures commission merchants (FCMs) that accept non-securities stablecoins as customer margin collateral.
The Staff Letter was first issued in December and originally indicated that, until the GENIUS Act comes into effect from January 2027, FCMs may only accept stablecoins as collateral where the stablecoin is issued by a state-regulated trust company or money transmitter. Otherwise, they must wait until the GENIUS Act is implemented to accept stablecoins issued by other entities.
The CFTC has now updated the definition of “payment stablecoin” contained in the letter to reflect that national trust banks can already be permitted issuers. To date, the US Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has conditionally provided national trust banking charters to a number of digital asset firms, including some that have already issued or plan to issue dollar-backed stablecoins.
While the GENIUS Act contains new requirements for stablecoin issuers that will become effective from January 2027, the OCC has previously clarified that stablecoin issuance and custody are already permissible activities for national trust banks.
By updating its public-facing policy statement, the CFTC is ensuring that market participants can engage in the full range of permissible activities currently allowed under US law.
In a statement about the reissuance, CFTC Chairman Michael Selig stated, “I’m pleased that the CFTC staff is amending its previously issued no-action letter to expand the list of eligible tokenized collateral to include payment stablecoins issued by these institutions. With the enactment of the GENIUS Act and the CFTC’s new eligible collateral framework, America is the global leader in payment stablecoin innovation.”
Hong Kong plans to issue first stablecoin licenses in March
Senior policymakers in Hong Kong confirmed that the first local stablecoin licenses will be issued in March, marking an important milestone in the city’s efforts to establish itself as a regional hub for digital asset innovation.
Speaking on February 11 at the Consensus conference hosted by CoinDesk, Hong Kong’s Financial Secretary Paul Chan Mo-Po confirmed that the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) intends to issue a limited number of licenses under its stablecoin regulatory framework for the first time. The HKMA, Hong Kong’s central bank and banking supervisor, previously ran a stablecoin regulatory sandbox in which participants including Standard Chartered Bank and Animoca Brands tested fiat-referenced stablecoin use cases.
The sandbox informed the HKMA’s design of its stablecoin regulatory regime, which went into effect in August 2025 and requires stablecoin issuers to adhere to robust regulatory requirements, including expectations for anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) compliance using blockchain analytics.
Since launching the regime, the HKMA has indicated that it will issue licenses incrementally to ensure licensees demonstrate adequate compliance before the full launch of their stablecoins.
Promoting financial sector innovation via stablecoins is central to Hong Kong’s efforts to position itself as a leading hub for digital assets. The city is also running a tokenization pilot program that aims to test the use of tokenized deposits to facilitate more efficient interbank settlement.
To learn more about Hong Kong’s ambitions to become a hub for digital asset innovation, see our webinar on the topic here.
China confirms ban on stablecoins and confirms strict oversight of tokenized assets
The approach to digital assets differs significantly on the Chinese mainland, where authorities have clarified that their longstanding ban on cryptoasset activity extends to stablecoins.
On February 6, press reports confirmed that the People’s Bank of China (PBoC), the country’s central bank, issued a notice clarifying that its nearly decade-long prohibition on cryptoasset trading and related activities extends to the issuance and use of stablecoins.
Previous reports had suggested that Chinese officials were considering whether to enable limited issuance of yuan-linked stablecoins in response to efforts by the US and other jurisdictions to facilitate stablecoin innovation. This latest development, however, suggests that the PBoC has no intention of allowing private firms to issue stablecoins, and that it remains committed to promoting its central bank digital currency (CBDC).
In contrast to its approach on stablecoins, the PBoC appears to be taking a more nuanced stance on the tokenization of real-world assets (RWAs). Reports suggest that the PBoC intends to bring tokenization activity within the scope of existing financial services regulation, and that its approach will include efforts to assert jurisdiction over entities outside China that launch tokenization projects linked to RWAs located in China.
Industry warns that EU risks falling behind in global tokenization race
Digital asset firms in the European Union have warned that Europe risks losing ground in the global race to spur innovation through tokenization.
On February 5, eight EU-based firms, including Securitize, 21X and Boerse Stuttgart, sent a letter to European policymakers urging them to accelerate reforms to the Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) Pilot Regime to keep pace with developments in the US and other jurisdictions.
Under the DLT Pilot Regime, which the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has administered since 2023, regulated firms in the EU can roll out blockchain-based innovations, such as tokenized financial products, with approval and oversight from national-level supervisors. ESMA coordinates standards under the regime and issues guidance.
The European Commission is working on a comprehensive package of reforms aimed at boosting Europe’s financial sector integration and innovation: the EU Market Integration and Supervision Package (MISP).
The MISP includes plans to relax the DLT Pilot Regime’s current limits so that market participants can bring tokenized financial services to market more quickly. However, the MISP is expected to undergo a phased implementation that may not see the fully reformed DLT Pilot Regime take effect until 2029 or later.
In their letter to members of the European Commission, European Parliament and Council of Europe, the eight firms warn that current restrictions under the program will make it impractical for EU-based firms to compete with markets in the US, UK, Hong Kong, Singapore and others that are prioritizing tokenization.
The firms propose that the EU should pass separate, less complex legislation to introduce changes to the existing DLT Pilot Regime on an accelerated schedule, including raising transaction caps to €100-150 billion, removing the six-year time limit on licenses and eliminating restrictions on eligible assets.
They argue that these changes could take effect before 2029 within the scope of the existing regime, without undermining the more permanent overhaul under the MISP.
