The White House will host senior executives from major U.S. banks and cryptocurrency companies in a closed-door meeting aimed at brokering a compromise on pending digital-asset legislation, according to a Reuters exclusive.

The gathering brings together lenders and digital-asset firms whose public positions have diverged for more than two years over the scope of stablecoin oversight, custody rules and the architecture of a long-pending market-structure bill, Reuters reported.

What is the administration trying to broker?

The meeting reflects a White House strategy of using convening power to surface consensus before formal bill text is locked in committee. Officials aim to align the banking industry's concerns with the crypto sector's push for clearer rules. The format mirrors earlier Treasury-led roundtables on payment stablecoins and signals a renewed administration focus on digital-asset policy at a moment when Congress has cleared other major items from its calendar.

Why are banks and crypto at odds?

Lenders have pressed for narrow definitions of "digital asset" and "payment stablecoin" to keep core banking products from being reclassified. They have raised alarms about deposit-flight risk, concentration in tokenized reserves and the regulatory perimeter for custodial services. Industry groups have countered with demands for explicit SEC-CFTC jurisdictional boundaries, a path to bank charters for non-bank issuers, and statutory protections for self-custody.

What is the legislative backdrop?

The Senate Banking and House Financial Services Committees have signaled intent to move stablecoin and market-structure bills, though neither chamber has produced a final text that bridges the bank and crypto industries. A White House-brokered framework could compress the timeline and reduce the number of competing drafts lawmakers must reconcile.

What happens after the meeting?

The closed-door format is intended to give negotiators room to move off public positions. According to the Reuters report, the administration is expected to summarize areas of agreement and disagreement after the meeting and feed that document into committee activity. Industry executives who have participated in similar convenings describe them as procedural rather than decisional: a way to identify the narrow set of issues that can survive a floor vote.

Why does it matter for markets?

The outcome will determine which firms end up inside the regulatory perimeter and which sit outside it. Banks and issuers that align with the framework gain a path to compliant product rollout. Those left on the wrong side of the compromise face a longer wait for clarity and continued reliance on enforcement guidance. The administration's move signals an intent to deliver signed digital-asset legislation before the end of the congressional session rather than allow the rule book to be set by enforcement actions and court rulings.