The markup session for the CLARITY Act just heated up as a major compliance platform withdrew its support, throwing the regulatory debate back into focus. The tension is real: policymakers want 'clear rules,' but industry players worry those same rules could stifle technological advancement and competitive edge.
A leading exchange executive made it plain—their stance is firm. The current bill framework doesn't cut it. According to their position, no legislation beats a flawed one that handcuffs the sector's ability to innovate. This "all or nothing" approach signals how far apart the two sides still are when it comes to balancing regulatory clarity with operational flexibility.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
9 Likes
Reward
9
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
BearMarketSurvivor
· 11h ago
Once again, it's that tired old dichotomy of "Innovation vs. Regulation." I'm really tired of seeing the industry dance to the policies' tune.
View OriginalReply0
MentalWealthHarvester
· 11h ago
Well, this routine is the same old story. Regulatory authorities want clear rules, but the crypto circle says it will be restricted. Who will ultimately compromise?
View OriginalReply0
HalfIsEmpty
· 11h ago
Here we go again? Regulators want "clear rules," while the crypto community is shouting that innovation is being stifled. The two sides can never be separated.
View OriginalReply0
CryptoSurvivor
· 11h ago
It's the same old tune of "Innovation vs. Regulation." The exchanges are right in what they say, but it sounds like shifting blame. Do they really think they can do whatever they want without rules? The compliance platforms withdrawing support have definitely awakened many people... The current situation is a deadlock: on one side, we want freedom to innovate; on the other, we want to trade with confidence. Can we have both?
View OriginalReply0
BakedCatFanboy
· 11h ago
Here comes the old tune of "Innovation vs. Regulation" again... What does the withdrawal of support by compliant platforms directly reveal? It’s that no one is satisfied with this bill at all.
View OriginalReply0
mev_me_maybe
· 11h ago
ngl, this "all or nothing" is just playing childish... Big exchanges really think of themselves as the parent.
View OriginalReply0
MetaverseHobo
· 11h ago
Nah, this is the typical vicious cycle of regulation vs. innovation, never able to reach an agreement.
The markup session for the CLARITY Act just heated up as a major compliance platform withdrew its support, throwing the regulatory debate back into focus. The tension is real: policymakers want 'clear rules,' but industry players worry those same rules could stifle technological advancement and competitive edge.
A leading exchange executive made it plain—their stance is firm. The current bill framework doesn't cut it. According to their position, no legislation beats a flawed one that handcuffs the sector's ability to innovate. This "all or nothing" approach signals how far apart the two sides still are when it comes to balancing regulatory clarity with operational flexibility.