The CLARITY Act, the most prominent US federal effort to settle regulatory jurisdiction over digital assets, has stalled in Congress, according to The Fulcrum.

Formally titled the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, the measure advanced through the House Financial Services Committee and the House Agriculture Committee in 2025. It sought to draw a statutory line between the Securities and Exchange Commission's authority over tokens sold as investment contracts and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's oversight of digital commodities.

House Financial Services Committee Chair French Hill and House Agriculture Committee Chair Glenn Thompson sponsored the framework.

What does the bill propose?

The legislation classified digital assets into three principal categories. Tokens such as bitcoin and ether — outside their initial distribution events — would qualify as "digital commodities" under CFTC jurisdiction.

Tokens sold to raise capital would initially sit with the SEC as "restricted digital assets." Issuers would gain a defined pathway to commodity treatment once tokens meet decentralization and liquidity criteria over time.

A third residual category covered assets that fit neither bucket. The bill routed those to an interagency determination.

The measure also proposed a registration framework for digital asset intermediaries — exchanges, brokers, and custodians. That framework would shift the sector from enforcement-led oversight toward a statutory perimeter.

Why has it stalled?

The Fulcrum's headline reporting did not specify which procedural step blocked the bill. The impasse reflects ongoing friction across four fronts that have shaped CLARITY negotiations throughout 2025.

Decentralized finance protocols sat at the center. Members of both committees disagreed on whether decentralized exchange front-ends and lending platforms should register with the SEC, the CFTC, or remain outside the federal perimeter.

Stablecoins presented a parallel complication, intersecting with separate legislation that advanced on its own track. Staking services raised SEC questions about investment-contract status. And House Agriculture members pressed the CFTC's capacity to supervise an enlarged spot-token market with current appropriations.

What changes if the bill eventually passes?

Enactment would replace the prevailing enforcement-driven posture. The SEC has brought most of its digital asset actions through case-by-case litigation under existing securities statutes. CLARITY would codify a framework classifying digital assets at the federal level and reduce reliance on agency interpretation.

Token issuers would gain a defined disclosure regime calibrated to whether an asset trades as a security, a commodity, or falls into neither bucket. Trading platforms would obtain a clearer federal registration route and reduce the ambiguity that has shaped enforcement risk for the past several years.

The bill would also codify CFTC authority over spot markets for non-security tokens. The agency has so far exercised that authority only through limited pilot programs. Codification would let the CFTC supervise cash markets with statutory backing, not through test programs and no-action letters.

What's next?

The bill's path through the House remains unclear without a renewed procedural vehicle: a discharge petition, a suspension of the rules, or attachment to a must-pass appropriations bill. Senate action would follow separately under that chamber's own timetable. The upper chamber has weighed companion digital asset market structure proposals.

The Fulcrum's headline did not identify a revised timeline for floor consideration. The bill's near-term fate depends on whether negotiations resume before the legislative calendar narrows further.