CLARITY Act Nears September Senate Vote With Passage Odds at 14%
The CLARITY Act faces its most consequential Senate test in just over two weeks, but U.S. crypto regulation is no longer waiting for Congress.
Summary:
- The Senate faces a September 15 procedural vote on the CLARITY Act, with 60 votes needed to advance the legislation.
- Political disputes over ethics rules, stablecoin rewards and illicit finance have narrowed the bill’s path through the Senate.
- Polymarket traders put the probability of the bill becoming law in 2026 at roughly 14%.
- The SEC has already proposed a standalone crypto offering framework, raising the stakes if Congress fails to act.
A procedural vote is expected on September 15, while the Securities and Exchange Commission has already proposed a dedicated framework for crypto offerings and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission is asserting its authority across other parts of digital-asset markets.
CLARITY needs 60 votes on September 15
The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, or CLARITY Act, is intended to establish a federal market structure for digital assets and clarify the respective roles of the SEC and CFTC.
Its path through Congress initially showed substantial bipartisan support.
The House passed H.R. 3633 by 294-134 in July 2025, with 78 Democrats joining Republicans. The Senate Banking Committee then advanced an amended version 15-9 in May 2026.
Progress stalled before the August recess as lawmakers failed to resolve several disputes, including ethics restrictions involving government officials’ crypto interests, stablecoin rewards and illicit-finance provisions.
Senators return on September 14, with a cloture vote expected the following day. Cloture requires 60 votes and would allow the Senate to move forward with consideration of the legislation.
It is not a final vote on passage.
Failure, however, would leave supporters with little room to revive the legislation before the October election recess. The compressed calendar makes September 15 the most important procedural test remaining for a 2026 deal.
Trump’s crypto interests have become part of the vote count
One of the obstacles is no longer directly about whether Bitcoin, Ethereum or other digital assets should fall under the SEC or CFTC.
Democratic senators have pushed for stronger restrictions preventing presidents and other senior government officials from issuing, promoting or profiting from crypto assets while in office.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand has said she would not support market-structure legislation without enforceable ethics provisions covering senior officeholders. The issue has become particularly contentious because of President Donald Trump’s financial interests in crypto-related ventures.
That changes the arithmetic behind the 60-vote threshold.
The House vote showed that market-structure legislation can attract substantial Democratic support. The Senate dispute is now about whether negotiators can preserve that bipartisan coalition while resolving provisions that were not central to the original jurisdictional debate.
With only a narrow legislative window remaining, unresolved language can matter as much as disagreement over the underlying regulatory model.
Prediction markets now see little chance of passage in 2026
Traders have become increasingly skeptical that Congress can finish the process this year.
According to CCN, Polymarket currently assigns the CLARITY Act roughly a 14% probability of being signed into law before the end of 2026, down from above 80% earlier this year.
Some traders have taken unusually large positions against passage.
One newly created account spent approximately $818,000 buying “No” shares, while another reportedly committed about $677,000 to the same outcome. Together, the positions amount to nearly $1.5 million in bets against the legislation becoming law this year.
READ MORE: California Moves to Block Public Officials From Launching Meme Coins
Those positions are measures of market sentiment, not evidence that the traders possess information about the Senate vote. There is no public evidence linking the accounts or showing access to nonpublic information.
The sharp repricing nevertheless reflects how much the legislative outlook has deteriorated since February.
The SEC has already opened another regulatory path
While Congress negotiates market structure, the SEC is moving under its existing statutory authority.
On August 18, the agency proposed Regulation Crypto Assets, its first standalone offering framework specifically tailored to certain investment contracts involving crypto assets.
The proposal would create two new exemptions from Securities Act registration.
A startup exemption would allow qualifying offerings of up to $5 million over four years, while a second fundraising exemption would permit offerings of up to $75 million during each 12-month period.
Issuers would still face disclosure requirements and remain subject to federal antifraud and antimanipulation rules. Larger exempt offerings would also carry financial-statement and ongoing reporting requirements.
The proposal goes further by creating a conditional safe harbor addressing when a crypto asset is no longer tied to an investment contract.
If an issuer has completed or permanently ceased the essential managerial efforts promised to investors and satisfies the other conditions, the asset could cease to be treated as subject to an investment contract for purposes of the federal securities laws.
Public comments are due October 20.
SEC rulemaking cannot replace everything in CLARITY
The SEC’s proposal gives crypto issuers a potential federal pathway without waiting for Congress, but there is a limit to what agency rulemaking can accomplish.
The SEC can interpret and administer securities laws already enacted by Congress. It cannot independently rewrite the statutory division of authority between itself and the CFTC.
CLARITY addresses that larger market structure.
Its importance lies partly in determining which digital assets and transactions fall within each regulator’s jurisdiction and establishing those boundaries through legislation rather than agency interpretation.
READ MORE: Vietnam Begins Crypto Overhaul as $173B Market Faces New Rules
SEC Chairman Paul Atkins acknowledged that limitation when unveiling Regulation Crypto Assets.
Despite moving ahead with the new framework, Atkins said congressional legislation remains “indispensable” for creating rules durable enough to survive changes in regulatory leadership.
That durability is one of the practical differences between the two routes.
An act of Congress creates statutory law. Agency regulations can provide substantial clarity within existing statutes, but they remain more exposed to litigation, reinterpretation and changes under future administrations.
The CFTC is asserting its own authority
The CFTC is also moving without waiting for a comprehensive market-structure law.
Chairman Michael Selig has taken an expansive view of the agency’s existing jurisdiction over commodity derivatives and prediction markets.
The agency has argued in federal court that the Commodity Exchange Act gives it exclusive jurisdiction over U.S. commodity derivatives markets, including event contracts traded on federally regulated prediction platforms.
Selig has also defended prediction markets against attempts to classify federally regulated event contracts as ordinary gambling products, arguing that the CFTC already has the authority and enforcement tools to supervise those markets.
For crypto, the institutional question is broader.
Many digital assets are already treated as commodities in particular contexts, but the absence of comprehensive legislation leaves gaps around spot-market supervision and the boundary between commodity and securities regulation.
CLARITY is designed to resolve more of that architecture through statute.
Without it, both agencies will continue testing how far their existing mandates extend.
September 15 is a choice between two regulatory paths
The practical consequence of a CLARITY failure would not be a return to regulatory paralysis.
That possibility has already been overtaken by events.
The SEC’s Regulation Crypto Assets is now an active rulemaking proposal with a public comment deadline. The CFTC continues to assert jurisdiction where it believes existing commodities law applies. Other crypto rules can advance through the same administrative process.
What Congress offers is different: a statutory framework capable of assigning responsibilities between regulators instead of leaving those boundaries to separate agency actions, court decisions and future administrations.
That is what makes September 15 consequential.
If CLARITY advances, Congress retains a path toward writing the architecture of U.S. crypto market structure itself. If it stalls, the SEC and CFTC will still regulate digital assets, but increasingly through powers derived from statutes written before modern crypto markets existed.
The debate is therefore moving beyond whether the United States will regulate crypto. With regulators already writing rules, the remaining question is who gets to design the framework that lasts.
The information presented in this article is intended for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as financial, investment, or trading advice. Coinspress.com does not promote or advocate for any particular investment strategy, asset, or cryptocurrency project. Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile and unpredictable – always perform your own research and seek guidance from a qualified financial professional before making any investment decisions.
Alexander Zdravkov
Reporter at CoinsPress
Alexander Zdravkov is a market analyst and crypto journalist with interests in economics, broader financial markets and digital assets. His journey into crypto began more than four years ago, driven by a fascination with the rapid evolution of blockchain technology and the transformative potential of decentralized finance. He began analyzing market cycles and identifying emerging trends before they reach the mainstream. He holds a degree in International Relations - a background that helped shape his broader perspective on global economics, geopolitics, and the interconnected nature of modern financial markets. Whether covering the latest developments in the crypto sector or exploring broader macroeconomic themes, Alexander focuses on giving readers context rather than simply repeating headlines. During his career, he has authored more than 10,000 articles covering cryptocurrencies, traditional finance, and global market developments. His work spans everything from Bitcoin and altcoins to macroeconomic trends influencing risk assets worldwide.
