The United States did not lose its crypto rules on 15 September. It lost the chance to make them permanent.
On 15 September 2026 the US Senate voted 49 to 50 against invoking cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 3633, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. Cloture required sixty votes. The bill never reached the floor, so no senator ever voted on its substance.
This overview explains what the vote decided, why the United States still has a working crypto framework without it, and which dates now matter for institutions.
Key takeaways
- The vote was procedural. Collins, Hawley, Moran and Tillis voted no, and Coons did not vote. Tillis voted no in order to enter a motion to reconsider, but the lead sponsor had already said a failed vote meant it was over.
- No Democrat voted yes, despite 126 changes sponsors made at Democratic request and a presidential concession on ethics. The obstacle may never have been the text.
- The SEC and CFTC settled token classification six months earlier. Their 17 March 2026 interpretive release named eighteen assets as digital commodities, including bitcoin, ether, solana and XRP, and confirmed protocol staking is not a securities offering.
- The vote removed durability, not clarity. A future Commission can withdraw agency rules. Only the GENIUS Act rests in statute, and both agency chairs say they will proceed regardless.
Why did the CLARITY Act fail?
It failed over presidential ethics and bank deposits, not securities law. Democrats held that the ethics division did not adequately stop a sitting president profiting from digital assets; community banks objected to stablecoin rewards.
One detail explains the bank position better than the public argument did. The Treasury “circuit breaker” that sponsors presented as protection for community banks expires 18 months after enactment, under the sponsors’ own changelog. The bill asked banks to accept a permanent change in deposit competition for temporary cover. The White House had separately modelled a yield ban as lifting total US bank lending by 0.02%.
Does the US still have crypto rules without the CLARITY Act?
Yes, but through agency action rather than statute, so the gap is durability rather than content. Of roughly twelve regulatory layers, the vote set back three.
Figure 1: What the 15 September vote did and did not change
| Regulatory layer | Who governs it today | Instrument | Set back |
|---|---|---|---|
| Token classification | SEC with CFTC | Interpretive release, March 2026 | No, but unlegislated |
| Token issuance | SEC | Regulation Crypto Assets, proposed | No |
| Trading venues | States, CFTC for leverage | Licensing, DCM registration | Yes, the principal gap |
| Stablecoins | Treasury, OCC, FDIC, Fed | GENIUS Act, enacted | Only the yield question |
| Bank capital, custody | OCC, Fed, FDIC | Interagency FAQs | No |
| DeFi, financial crime | Largely unaddressed | Enforcement discretion | Yes |
Sources: US Senate; SEC; Federal Reserve; AMINA Bank AG
What does this mean for banks and institutional investors?
Less than the headlines suggest. Banks may already provide crypto safekeeping, the SEC has rescinded SAB 121, and in March 2026 the Federal Reserve, OCC and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) confirmed that an eligible tokenised security carries the same capital treatment as its non-tokenised form. That position extends to permissionless chains, whereas the Basel Committee’s SCO60 standard does not, an asymmetry in tokenised collateral that an FAQ created rather than any act of Congress.
Two losses are less obvious. The bill would have required joint SEC and CFTC rules enabling portfolio margining across securities, swaps, futures and digital commodity accounts, the largest capital-efficiency item in the text, and barred a digital commodity exchange or its affiliates from acting as counterparty on its own venue. Cross-margining therefore stays a proprietary capability rather than a market utility, and the vertically integrated exchange model survives.
The most candid assessment came from the SEC itself. Chair Paul Atkins said the night before the vote that one question keeps coming back, namely when a covered investment contract ceases to exist, and that this was why he wanted the bill. A regulator can build a safe harbour. It cannot amend the definition of a security.
What happens next for US crypto regulation?
Three tracks, none of which needs Congress. The CFTC has the most consequential move: Chair Michael Selig directed staff in August to design a new registration category, a crypto asset market, using powers the agency already holds. The route matters. The agency’s cleanest hook into retail spot crypto is the requirement that leveraged and margined retail transactions trade on a registered exchange, so America’s first federally supervised crypto venue is likely to be a leveraged one, a sequence no legislature would have chosen.
The SEC is running three workstreams: Regulation Crypto Assets; modernisation of transfer agent rules that the Commission has not revised in roughly forty years, which decides whether a tokenised security is the ownership record or a claim on one; and a custody proposal to let advisers hold crypto for clients, including regulated funds.
Tax is moving separately. House Ways and Means is scheduled to mark up a 114-page digital asset tax bill the day after the vote, covering de minimis fees, wash sales, lending transfers and the source and character of mining and staking income. Timing is the omission. The separate Tax Clarity for Mining and Staking Act, which would let validators defer tax until they sell, is not in the package, so block rewards stay taxable on receipt.
Figure 2: Dates that now matter more than the bill
| Date | Event | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 20 October 2026 | Regulation Crypto Assets comment period closes | Proposed rule |
| 3 November 2026 | US midterm elections | Sets any 2027 legislative path |
| 18 January 2027 | GENIUS Act expected effective date | Enacted law |
| 25 October 2027 | UK cryptoasset regime applies | Enacted, rules final |
| 18 July 2028 | GENIUS gate on unlicensed stablecoins | Enacted law |
Sources: Federal Register; US Treasury; AMINA Bank
FAQ
Did the CLARITY Act pass?
No. The Senate failed to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 3633 by 49 votes to 50, short of the 60 it needed. The House had passed its version 294 to 134 in July 2025.
Is the CLARITY Act dead?
For 2026, effectively yes. Lead sponsor Senator Cynthia Lummis told reporters before the vote that if cloture failed, “it’s over.” Tillis entered a motion to reconsider, but that only re-runs the same vote, and no Democrat backed it. The House leaves Washington this week until after the 3 November election, so even Senate passage could not produce law. The realistic routes are the lame duck or the next Congress.
How does this affect non-US banks and investors?
The binding constraint is GENIUS, not CLARITY. From 18 January 2027 foreign-issued stablecoins reach US persons only under lawful-order and reciprocity conditions; from 18 July 2028 only licensed issuers qualify.
Disclaimer: Research and Educational Content
This document has been prepared by AMINA Bank AG (“AMINA”). AMINA is a Swiss licensed bank and securities dealer with its head office and legal domicile in Switzerland. It is authorised and regulated by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (“FINMA”).
This document is published solely for educational purposes; it is not an advertisement nor a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any financial investment or to participate in any particular investment strategy. This document is for publication only on AMINA website, blog, and AMINA social media accounts as permitted by applicable law. It is not directed to, or intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of or located in any locality, state, country or other jurisdiction where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to law or regulation or would subject AMINA to any registration or licensing requirement within such jurisdiction.
Research will initiate, update and cease coverage solely at the discretion of AMINA. This document is based on various sources, incl. AMINA ones. In preparing this document, AMINA may have made limited use of artificial intelligence-enabled tools to assist with research, summarisation, and drafting, with all content subject to human review and validation.
No representation or warranty, either express or implied, is provided in relation to the accuracy, completeness or reliability of the information contained in this document, except with respect to information concerning AMINA. The information is not intended to be a complete statement or summary of the subjects alluded to in the document, whereas general information, financial investments, markets or developments. AMINA does not undertake to update or keep current information. Any statements contained in this document attributed to a third party represent AMINA’s interpretation of the data, information and/or opinions provided by that third party either publicly or through a subscription service, and such use and interpretation have not been reviewed by the third party.
Any formulas, equations, or prices stated in this document are for informational or explanatory purposes only and do not represent valuations for individual investments. There is no representation that any transaction can or could have been affected at those formulas, equations, or prices, and any formula(s), equation(s), or price(s) do not necessarily reflect AMINA’s internal books and records or theoretical model-based valuations and may be based on certain assumptions. Different assumptions by AMINA or any other source may yield substantially different results.
Nothing in this document constitutes a representation that any investment strategy or investment is suitable or appropriate to an investor’s individual circumstances or otherwise constitutes a personal recommendation. Investments involve risks, and investors should exercise prudence and their own judgment in making their investment decisions. Financial investments described in the document may not be eligible for sale in all jurisdictions or to certain categories of investors. Certain services and products are subject to legal restrictions and cannot be offered on an unrestricted basis to certain investors. Recipients are therefore asked to consult the restrictions relating to investments, products or services for further information. Furthermore, recipients may consult their legal/tax advisors should they require any clarifications.
At any time, investment decisions (including, among others, deposit, buy, sell or hold investments) made by AMINA and its employees may differ from or be contrary to the opinions expressed in AMINA research publications.
This document may not be reproduced, or copies circulated without prior authority of AMINA. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, AMINA expressly prohibits the distribution and transfer of this document to third parties for any reason. AMINA accepts no liability whatsoever for any claims or lawsuits from any third parties arising from the use or distribution of this document.
©2026 AMINA, Kolinplatz 15, 6300 Zug