Banking and Crypto will review the CLARITY Act again: This is the date you should mark on your calendar if you own crypto assets

Banking and crypto ecosystem leaders will discuss stablecoin performance and the CLARITY Act at the White House.

Eleanor Terrett, journalist of Crypto in AmericaHe confirmed that representatives from traditional banking and leaders in the cryptocurrency sector will meet again at the White House. The meeting is scheduled for next Tuesday and aims to unravel the regulatory conflicts that keep both industries in opposing positions regarding the structure of the digital financial market. 

The central focus of the discussion will be the CLARITY ActA regulation designed to provide a robust legal framework for digital assets in Washington, but which faces significant obstacles regarding the handling of returns on stablecoins. Banking industry sources indicated that this meeting, unlike previous meetings that were limited to the technical staff level, It will feature the direct presence of delegates from the banks themselves, along with commercial groups.This raises the profile of a negotiation that seeks to define the future of digital money in the United States.

Stablecoins: a debate between stability and financial competition

The main point of contention that the parties will address this Tuesday lies in the proposed restrictions on stablecoin yields. 

Under previous frameworks such as the GENIUS ActPayment stablecoins, such as USDC, must be fully backed by cash or short-term Treasury bonds, but are prohibited from paying interest directly to their holders. This regulation treats stablecoins strictly as digital money and not as financial products capable of generating profits. However, industry analysts warn that this prohibition creates a clear structural imbalance in the current market, where 3-month US Treasury bonds offer a yield of around 3,6%, while traditional bank savings accounts pay considerably lower rates.

The crypto industry argues that prohibiting regulated stablecoins from offering yield will not protect the U.S. financial system, but rather have the opposite effect: marginalizing regulated institutions and accelerating the migration of capital away from U.S. oversight. The central argument of crypto industry leaders is that if investors cannot earn returns on products that comply with local regulations, capital will inevitably move abroad or into synthetic structures operating outside the regulatory framework. 

Scott BessentSecretary of the Treasury, manifested He recently emphasized the importance of the CLARITY Act being enacted, acknowledging the efforts in the Senate to advance this critical legislation and stating that the digital asset revolution requires leadership from both sides to reach the goal.

The discussion between the parties regarding regulatory policy towards the crypto industry has become more intense when considering the competitive impact. 

Banks have historically argued that yield-generating stablecoins could trigger massive deposit outflows, weakening their lending capacity, since deposits are fundamental to their funding. 

However, experts point out that framing this as unfair competition is a conceptual error. The reality is that banks pay depositors near-zero interest rates while pocketing the return differential of the underlying assets. If an investor can earn between 4% and 5% on stablecoin deposits through exchanges, the reallocation of capital to the crypto sector is simply a rational economic outcome, not a market distortion.

Crypto warns of the risk of closing the door to innovation

The risk to be discussed at the White House next week extends beyond competition between banks and stablecoin issuers. The crypto community warns that limiting domestic performance could create a vacuum that would be quickly filled by so-called "synthetic dollars." These are instruments pegged to the dollar's value that maintain their parity through structured trading strategies rather than one-to-one fiat reserves. 

According to experts, the real danger lies not in synthetics themselves, but in unregulated ones that operate without adequate disclosure requirements and that could attract capital fleeing US restrictions.

One example that stands out in this regard is the Ethena's USDeA product that generates returns through delta-neutral strategies involving the use of collateral and perpetual cryptocurrency futures. Since these products do not fit the standard definition of payment stablecoins under the GENIUS Act, they fall under a regulatory gray area. 

According to experts, if Congress tries to protect the banking system by imposing strict bans on returns in regulated stablecoins, it could inadvertently incentivize demand for these alternative products, leaving American consumers exposed to structures that are mostly foreign, less transparent, and completely outside the jurisdiction of Washington regulators.

Crypto industry advocates will emphasize on Tuesday that consumers already have access to money markets, Treasury bonds, and high-yield accounts through other channels. Stablecoins simply extend that access to cryptocurrency-native environments where traditional banking channels are ineffective. Next week's meeting will be crucial in determining whether the current administration and the banking sector are willing to embrace a model where the returns on digital money are shared with the end user, or whether they will maintain a restrictive stance that could push financial innovation beyond North American borders.