CLARITY Act Update: Senator Tillis Seeks Delay of Crypto Bill Markup Until May in Senate Banking Committee

The debate over U.S. crypto regulation is intensifying as Senator Thom Tillis has called for a delay in the Senate Banking Committee’s markup of the highly anticipated CLARITY Act. According to recent reports, Tillis is urging lawmakers to postpone the crypto market structure bill review until May, citing ongoing negotiations between banking institutions and the crypto industry over stablecoin yield rules.

The request adds new uncertainty to an already closely watched legislative process that could shape the future of digital asset regulation in the United States.

Senator Tillis Pushes for Delay in CLARITY Act Markup

Senator Thom Tillis has reportedly urged Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott to delay advancing the CLARITY Act markup scheduled for April. Speaking on the matter, Tillis emphasized the need for more deliberation and stakeholder input before moving forward.

“We need to be looking at May as a markup time,” Tillis stated, signaling that the legislative process should not be rushed.

He further reinforced this position in comments to reporters, explaining that accelerating the process could undermine the quality of the legislation.

“It’s very important to me not to accelerate things, to hear everybody, give them a rational basis for what we do accept,” he said.

His remarks suggest growing resistance within the committee to fast-tracking the crypto bill amid unresolved policy disputes.

Stablecoin Yield Dispute at the Center of Delay

At the heart of the delay is an ongoing negotiation between traditional banking groups and cryptocurrency stakeholders over stablecoin yield provisions.

Senator Tillis has played a key role in efforts to broker a compromise between both sides. The central issue revolves around whether stablecoins should be allowed to generate yield or interest-like returns for holders.

Banks have strongly opposed such provisions, arguing that allowing stablecoin yields could lead to deposit outflows from traditional financial institutions. They claim this could destabilize lending markets and reduce liquidity in the banking system.

On the other hand, crypto advocates argue that yield-bearing stablecoins are a natural extension of decentralized finance innovation and are essential for maintaining competitiveness in the global digital asset ecosystem.

The lack of agreement has become one of the primary sticking points delaying progress on the CLARITY Act.

Senate Banking Committee Timeline Under Pressure

The Senate Banking Committee now faces a critical decision window. According to legislative schedules, the committee must decide by Friday whether to proceed with a markup of the CLARITY Act if a vote is expected during the week of April 27.

However, growing lobbying pressure from both the banking sector and crypto industry participants has complicated the timeline.

In addition, the committee’s workload includes the nomination hearing for Kevin Warsh, further tightening the legislative calendar and increasing the likelihood of a delay.

As a result, expectations are shifting toward a potential markup in mid-May rather than April, aligning with Senator Tillis’ recommendation.

Banking Industry Opposition Intensifies

The banking sector has ramped up its opposition to stablecoin yield provisions in recent weeks. Industry representatives argue that permitting yields on stablecoins fails to address the core risks of deposit migration from traditional banks to digital assets.

The American Bankers Association has also publicly criticized recent policy discussions, including a White House report on digital assets. The organization has launched advertising campaigns opposing the inclusion of stablecoin yield mechanisms in the CLARITY Act.

Banks maintain that regulatory safeguards are insufficient to prevent systemic risks if stablecoins are allowed to compete directly with interest-bearing bank deposits.

This opposition continues to exert significant influence over lawmakers negotiating the final structure of the bill.

Crypto Industry Pushes Back for Regulatory Clarity

On the other side of the debate, cryptocurrency industry participants are urging lawmakers to move forward with clear and comprehensive regulation. Many argue that the lack of a finalized framework is creating uncertainty in the digital asset market and slowing institutional adoption.

The CLARITY Act has been positioned as a foundational piece of legislation that could define how digital assets are classified, traded, and regulated in the United States.

Supporters believe that delaying the markup could further hinder innovation and weaken the U.S. position in the global crypto economy.

Treasury Secretary Supports Legislative Action

Adding another dimension to the debate, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has urged Congress to pass the CLARITY Act. He has warned that continued delays could have broader implications for financial markets.

According to Bessent, the uncertainty surrounding crypto regulation has already impacted investor sentiment, including pressure on Bitcoin prices and the broader digital asset market.

He has also highlighted increasing institutional adoption of cryptocurrencies, arguing that regulatory clarity is now urgently needed to support market stability and growth.

Market Sentiment and Political Uncertainty

The legislative delays have also influenced market expectations regarding the likelihood of crypto legislation passing this year.

Prediction market data from Polymarket indicates that traders now assign roughly a 50% probability that President Donald Trump will sign the CLARITY Act into law within the year. This marks a decline from a recent high of 64%, reflecting growing uncertainty after the latest setback in the Senate.

The shift in sentiment underscores how closely financial markets are tracking developments in Washington as regulatory clarity remains unresolved.

Broader Implications for U.S. Crypto Regulation

The CLARITY Act is widely seen as a key step in establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets in the United States. Its provisions are expected to define jurisdictional boundaries between regulatory agencies, clarify asset classifications, and establish compliance standards for crypto businesses.

However, the ongoing dispute over stablecoin yields highlights the broader challenge lawmakers face in balancing innovation with financial stability.

If the markup is delayed until May, it could push final passage timelines further into the year, increasing uncertainty for both investors and industry participants.

What Happens Next

All eyes are now on the Senate Banking Committee as it approaches its decision deadline. If lawmakers agree to delay the markup, negotiations are expected to continue throughout May with the goal of reaching a compromise on stablecoin yield provisions.

Key stakeholders-including banks, crypto firms, and Treasury officials-are expected to intensify lobbying efforts in the coming weeks.

The outcome will likely determine whether the CLARITY Act advances as a unified bipartisan effort or becomes further stalled in legislative gridlock.

Conclusion

Senator Thom Tillis’ call to delay the CLARITY Act markup reflects the complex and divided landscape surrounding U.S. crypto regulation. With banking institutions and crypto advocates still at odds over stablecoin yields, the Senate Banking Committee faces mounting pressure to find a workable compromise.

As negotiations continue and political stakes rise, the decision to move the markup to May could prove pivotal for the future of digital asset regulation in the United States-and for the broader trajectory of the crypto industry.

Also Read: Cardano vs Polkadot – Can Either Replace Ethereum? A Deep 2026 Crypto Analysis