Brad Garlinghouse, the chief executive of Ripple Labs, has publicly argued that the CLARITY Act — despite its imperfections — would be preferable to the current state of regulatory uncertainty in the U.S. He frames the bill as a practical step toward predictable rules that let businesses plan and operate with more confidence. That position has deepened a split in the industry between those who prioritize immediate legal clarity and those who fear the bill’s text could constrain innovation.
Introduction to the CLARITY Act and Ripple's Stance
The CLARITY Act is a congressional proposal intended to create a comprehensive regulatory structure for digital assets and to clarify the jurisdictional boundary between the SEC and the CFTC. Garlinghouse has advocated engaging with lawmakers to improve the bill rather than rejecting it outright, arguing that a workable, if imperfect, law is better than ongoing enforcement-driven uncertainty. This stance highlights a broader industry exhaustion with the current enforcement approach and a desire for clearer rules.
The High Cost of Regulatory Uncertainty
Regulatory ambiguity in the United States has complicated banking relationships, product launches, and compliance efforts for many firms operating in the crypto space. A 2024 report by the Chamber of Digital Commerce estimated that regulatory uncertainty has deterred over $120 billion in potential blockchain investment in the U.S. since 2020. Garlinghouse points to these business impacts as a core reason he supports a legislative baseline that can be refined later.
Key Provisions and Industry Divide
The CLARITY Act focuses on several core objectives, including defining when an asset is treated as a security versus a commodity and creating registration pathways for trading platforms. Supporters say the bill would finally provide long-sought legal certainty, while critics warn that specific clauses could unintentionally limit certain uses of blockchain technology. The debate centers on finding a balance between consumer protection, regulatory clarity, and preserving room for innovation.
Coinbase's Objections to the CLARITY Act
Coinbase publicly withdrew its support for the CLARITY Act and outlined a set of substantive concerns about the draft text. Their critique does not oppose regulation in principle but challenges how this particular bill would treat key areas of the market. Coinbase warns that several provisions, as currently written, could have deep implications for tokenized assets, DeFi, and the distribution of regulatory authority.
- Potential effective ban on tokenized securities being represented on-chain.
- Overbroad rules for decentralized finance (DeFi) that could affect open-source projects and user privacy.
- A shift in enforcement power that may concentrate authority with the SEC rather than balancing it with the CFTC.
- Restrictions on features like rewards or yields tied to stablecoins.
The Ripple vs. Coinbase Strategic Dissonance
Ripple’s position is shaped by its experience with regulatory enforcement and a priority on obtaining clear jurisdictional rules to end prolonged legal uncertainty. Coinbase’s objections reflect concerns that the bill, if enacted as drafted, could place structural limits on future innovation, especially in areas like tokenization and DeFi. This split illustrates a wider industry question: whether to accept an imperfect statutory framework now or continue pushing for a more narrowly tailored law.
Global Context and the Urgency for U.S. Action
Other jurisdictions have already moved to establish clearer crypto rules, and the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation was implemented in 2024 to provide a unified framework across its member states. Proponents of the CLARITY Act argue that establishing a baseline U.S. law is necessary to keep domestic firms competitive and to reduce the outflow of capital and talent. The bill’s supporters believe that starting from a legislative foundation allows for later amendments to correct flaws.
For more detail on the bill’s legislative progress, see CLARITY Act progress. For context on how regulatory clarity has affected specific assets, see XRP regulatory clarity.
Почему это важно
Если вы майните в России и управляете от одного до тысячи устройств, принятие базового закона в США вряд ли изменит ваш рутинный рабочий процесс мгновенно, но оно влияет на глобальную экосистему обменов, сервисов и инфраструктуры. Более предсказуемые правила в крупных юрисдикциях обычно приводят к тому, что биржи и провайдеры услуг легче проектируют продукты и устанавливают международные партнёрства, что в результате может повлиять на доступность рынков и ликвидность. Даже если у вас локальная деятельность, стоит отслеживать такие изменения, потому что они задают параметры для глобальных сервисов, которыми вы пользуетесь.
Что делать?
- Следите за новостями о развитии CLARITY Act и позициях крупных провайдеров — это поможет заранее понять возможные изменения в политике бирж и платёжных провайдеров.
- Документируйте настройки и операционные процессы майнинга, включая договора с сервисами и провайдерами, чтобы быстро реагировать на изменения в требованиях по AML/KYC или листингу активов.
- Проверяйте правила и условия используемых вами бирж и кошельков — если провайдеры меняют политику, это может повлиять на доступ к выводу средств или сервисам.
- Поддерживайте резервные копии и планы отказоустойчивости оборудования: непрерывность работы важна независимо от регуляторных изменений.
