Stablecoin yield disputes stir US legislation: traditional banks oppose, industry insiders call for regulatory rationality

YieldWhisperer · 2026-01-21T03:34:09+00:00

Galaxy Digital CEO Mike Novogratz pointed out that the U.S. Crypto Market Structure Act is struggling due to issues with stablecoin yield mechanisms. Political pressure from banks opposing crypto platform yield rewards is significantly affecting the bill's progress, harming consumer interests. He called for rational voices to lead regulation.

YieldWhisperer

2026-01-21 03:34:09

Abstract generation in progress

【ChainNews】On January 21, Galaxy Digital CEO Mike Novogratz spoke out on social media, directly pointing out that the US crypto market structure bill has fallen into an awkward situation. The focus of the controversy? The yield mechanism of stablecoins.

The attitude of traditional banks is very clear—they firmly oppose crypto platforms offering yield rewards to users. This is not commercial competition, but political pressure. Two-party lawmakers who support the banks’ stance have also joined in, jointly obstructing the progress of the bill. Mike Novogratz believes that this kind of political intervention could ultimately lead to the bill being stalled.

Unfortunately, this situation harms the genuine interests of American consumers. The original intention of the bill is very clear—to clarify the regulatory boundaries of the crypto industry and provide platforms with legal operational space. But now, the issue of yield terms has caused the entire legislative process to fall into difficulty.

Mike Novogratz’s call represents the industry consensus: the need for “rational voices to prevail,” rather than allowing the interests alliance of traditional finance and politicians to hijack the regulatory process.

View Original

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.

8 Likes

Reward
8
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GateUser-9f682d4c

· 1h ago

Traditional finance is like this. When they can't stand others making money, they have to sabotage it, and they must keep going. Banks are really getting anxious, fearing that crypto platforms will take their share, so they team up with lawmakers to obstruct, turning this political struggle into a burden for consumers. It's the same old trick, shouting for regulation and compliance on one hand while secretly making small moves on the other. The democracy in the US is truly ironic. Novogratz is right; if this bill falls through, the biggest losers will be us retail investors. This is outrageous. What's wrong with the returns on stablecoins? Traditional finance has monopolized for decades and still wants to continue monopolizing. It's hard to rise. When interest groups team up, they can ruin the entire bill. Web3 in the US isn't as free as you might think. Honestly, the banks are scared. Otherwise, they wouldn't be so eager to come out and oppose.

View OriginalReply0

MysteryBoxOpener

· 1h ago

The banks are really getting anxious, afraid that stablecoin yields will take away their business, so they bring out politicians to shut them up. This tactic is way too obvious.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCrier

· 1h ago

Bankers are really incredible. What are they afraid of? Are they just scared that we might earn some profits? Speaking of which, it's indeed a bit absurd for both parties to be involved in this matter... When it comes to stablecoin yields, it always feels like a trap. I truly believe Novogratz's statement that the project is stranded; political correctness can't outweigh economic interests. Regulatory oversight? Has this concept already become extinct in the US? The bill is going to be left unfinished again, betting five bucks... The old tricks of traditional finance are outdated; they can't stop Web3. The key issue is that consumers become cannon fodder, and ultimately no one's interests are protected. That's why I still remain optimistic about on-chain lending; banks can't control it. The yield clause has stalled the entire bill—ridiculous, isn't it? If I had known, I wouldn't have relied on Washington folks; I prefer to play comfortably on my own chain. Banking cartel vs. crypto innovation—this round is lost again. Blocking the bill—it's rare to see both parties in such agreement; how ironic.

View OriginalReply0

GamefiHarvester

· 1h ago

The banking system is really incredible. Are they directly applying political pressure because they fear stablecoin yields will take away their business? Isn't this just a monopoly, with retail investors only able to obediently get exploited? Traditional finance is this bad, no wonder young people are turning to crypto.

View OriginalReply0

TokenAlchemist

· 1h ago

ngl, traditional finance's regulatory capture playbook is so predictable it's almost painful to watch. they're literally extracting negative alpha on stablecoin yield mechanics just to preserve their obsolete deposit moat... classic inefficiency vector that'll get arbitraged away eventually, one way or another

Reply0