블로그로 돌아가기
CLARITY 법안 전쟁: 스테이블코인 수익률이 암호화폐 규제를 바꿀 이유
Coinbase가 스테이블코인 수익률 제한으로 인해 획기적인 암호화폐 법안 지원을 철회했습니다. 이 싸움이 DeFi의 미래에 왜 중요한지.
Miguel Treviño•
TL;DR:
- The Conflict: The CLARITY Act stalled in Congress due to intense lobbying from banks seeking to ban stablecoin yield.
- The Stakes: Banks fear losing trillions in deposits to permissionless, higher-yield stablecoin products.
- The Response: Coinbase withdrew support for the bill, arguing that a "bad bill" with yield restrictions is worse than no bill at all.
- The Lesson: In an uncertain regulatory environment, self-custody remains the only way to maintain true control over your financial freedom.
The most important crypto legislation in years just hit a wall.
The Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act—the bill that could finally bring regulatory clarity to crypto—has stalled. The reason? A battle over whether you should be able to earn yield on your stablecoins.
What Is the CLARITY Act?
The CLARITY Act would:
- Define which crypto assets are securities vs. commodities
- Create clear regulatory frameworks for exchanges and DeFi
- Classify major tokens like XRP, Solana, and Dogecoin as commodities (if they have regulated ETFs)
- Enable deeper institutional participation in crypto markets
In other words: the clarity the industry has been begging for since 2017.
Why Did It Stall?
One word: stablecoins.
The banking industry lobbied hard for provisions that would:
- Ban stablecoin issuers from paying interest on holdings
- Restrict exchanges from offering stablecoin rewards
- Protect traditional bank deposits from fleeing to stablecoins
Their argument? If stablecoins can pay yield, up to $6.6 trillion in bank deposits could migrate to crypto. The American Bankers Association claims Texas alone could lose $14.7-$29.3 billion.
Coinbase Walked Away
On January 14, CEO Brian Armstrong announced Coinbase was withdrawing support:
"We would rather have no bill than a bad bill."
Why the hard stance? Coinbase reportedly earned $355 million in stablecoin-related revenue in Q3 2025, offering ~3.5% rewards to customers. The proposed restrictions would kill that business line.
The Bigger Picture
This isn't just about Coinbase's revenue. It's about a fundamental question:
Who controls the future of money—banks or crypto?
Stablecoin yield threatens traditional banking because it offers something banks can't: instant, borderless, permissionless interest on dollars.
If you can earn 4% on USDC with no minimum balance, no bank account, and instant withdrawals... why would you keep money in a 0.5% savings account?
Why This Matters for DeFi
The CLARITY Act's DeFi provisions were equally concerning:
- Potential requirements for identity verification on DeFi protocols
- Possible restrictions on permissionless lending/borrowing
- Unclear treatment of decentralized governance tokens
The crypto industry wants clarity—but not at the cost of killing DeFi.
What Happens Next?
The Senate Banking Committee postponed its January 15 markup vote. Negotiations continue, but the fundamental conflict remains:
- Banks want protection from crypto competition
- Crypto wants freedom to innovate
- Regulators want control they can enforce
- Users want access to better financial products
Finding a compromise that satisfies everyone may be impossible.
The Zelf Perspective
Regardless of how regulation evolves, one thing remains constant: self-custody is the ultimate regulatory hedge.
When you control your own keys:
- You don't depend on exchange compliance decisions
- You're not affected by banking partnerships being severed
- Your assets remain accessible regardless of legislative changes
Zelf ensures your self-custody is:
- Secure: ZK Face Proof authentication
- Recoverable: No lost seed phrases
- Private: No biometric data stored
The regulatory landscape will keep shifting. Your control over your assets shouldn't.
The Bottom Line
The CLARITY Act drama reveals a truth about crypto regulation: everyone wants clarity, but no one wants to lose power.
Banks don't want to compete with stablecoin yield. Exchanges don't want to lose revenue streams. Regulators don't want permissionless systems they can't control.
The only party consistently getting what they want? Those who self-custody.
regulationstablecoindefilegislationcoinbase