Senate to Mark Up the CLARITY Act in January, Sacks Says — What Investors Should Expect

A January markup puts a new crypto rulebook in play

Senate staffer Sacks told reporters the CLARITY Act will be scheduled for a Senate committee markup in January. That simple timing signal matters: it moves the bill out of the concept phase and into the part of Congress where amendments and real votes happen. For investors, the immediate effect is a sharper timetable for when regulatory uncertainty could shrink — or flare up — and when markets might price that change in.

How the CLARITY Act would rewrite the rules around tokens, exchanges and custody

The bill is aimed at fixing the central question that has driven crypto markets for years: which crypto assets are securities and which are commodities or currency-like tokens. Under the CLARITY Act, the government would set clearer tests to classify tokens. That would reduce the SEC’s current broad case-by-case approach and create a statutory path that treats some tokens outside of securities law.

Second, the bill would change regulatory roles. Instead of leaving every consumer-facing decision to one regulator, the CLARITY Act would split authority more cleanly between agencies — for example, giving a clearer role to banking regulators on custody and to market regulators on exchanges. That matters for custody because banks and trust companies could gain an explicit, safer path to hold client crypto under bank custody rules, rather than relying on novel interpretations of securities custody law.

The bill also tightens rules for on-ramps and off-ramps — the places where fiat and crypto meet. Exchanges and broker-dealers would face clearer registration and operational standards, but the law would also create defined pathways for token listings and for asset managers to offer tradable products. Practically, the CLARITY Act aims to make it easier for long-only funds and pension-type investors to participate without breaching securities rules.

What this could do to token prices, ETFs, custody firms and institutional flows

If enacted as framed, the CLARITY Act would be a net positive for institutional participation. Clearer token definitions and a pathway for custody lower a major barrier: compliance risk. Funds managed by big firms — for example BlackRock (BLK) or asset custodians like BNY Mellon (BK) and State Street (STT) — could treat certain crypto assets more like other asset classes. That makes it more likely for large-scale liquidity to arrive.

One obvious market channel is ETFs and similar products. Firms that already run exchange-traded products or want to launch them would find it easier to list instruments tied to tokens that the law explicitly places outside securities rules. That would likely help existing trusts and ETFs, including legacy products such as the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC), by clarifying how they can operate and compete.

Token prices are likely to respond unevenly. Bitcoin-like assets and tokens the bill clearly classifies as non-securities stand to gain first, because market access would be simplest. Tokens with mixed or utility-like features that remain ambiguously treated could see a muted response or even short-term pressure if the bill exposes them to new registration needs. Exchanges themselves, including public venues like Coinbase (COIN) and Nasdaq (NDAQ), would benefit from clearer listing rules — but they would also face stricter operational requirements.

Custody providers are an important wildcard. Banks and established custodians getting an explicit safe harbor would draw flows away from unregulated custody models. That is good for institutional safety, but it could shave margins for nimble but less-regulated players.

When this could move and what the odds look like

A January markup means committee staff will draft amendments, set debate time, and allow members to propose changes. After markup, the bill must survive a committee vote to reach the Senate floor. Timetable risks are real: amendments could expand or narrow the bill significantly, and any controversial or sweeping change can slow progress.

Political dynamics matter. The bill’s champions will need cross‑party support to avoid being bottled up. If moderates and industry-friendly lawmakers secure carve-outs for banks and custody, the bill’s chances rise. Opponents who believe the measure gives too much leeway to crypto firms or who want a tougher SEC role could either water down the text or force delays. At present, the mechanics favor passage out of committee but not guaranteed final Senate approval without live horse-trading on amendments.

How the White House, regulators and industry are reacting

The White House has signaled interest in comprehensive crypto rules that protect consumers while encouraging responsible innovation; a bill that clarifies jurisdiction fits that tone. The SEC has historically pushed for broad authority to police token offerings, so any carve-out will draw scrutiny inside the agency and likely prompt public comment from regulators.

Industry groups and big exchanges are publicly supportive of clearer rules; they are also likely to mount a coordinated lobbying push to influence amendments that favor custody, bank participation and ETF pathways. Expect intense outreach from custodians and asset managers looking to lock in favorable language before markup.

Practical moves for investors to watch

Investors should mark the markup date in January and watch three near-term signals: the text of amendments released before markup, any votes in committee, and public statements from the SEC and major custodians. Market moves will likely follow the bill’s specifics: a text that widens safe-harbor language should push institutional-related stocks and non-security tokens higher; a version that tightens definitions could hit borderline tokens and exchanges that rely on ambiguous listings.

Risk scenarios matter: a stalled bill could prolong regulatory ambiguity and keep volatility high; a version that limits SEC authority could accelerate flows into token ETFs and custody services. Overall, the CLARITY Act looks constructive for mainstream institutional adoption, but investors should expect bumps as lawmakers and regulators fight over the details.

Sources

• cointelegraph.com
• cointelegraph.com
• cointelegraph.com
• cointelegraph.com