All Roll Calls
Yes: 343 • No: 184
119-hr3633119th CongressWALLET
Digital Asset Market Clarity Act
Sponsored By: Representative Hill, J. French [R-AR-2]
Passed House
Summary
Would create a comprehensive federal regulatory regime for digital assets. The bill would set unified definitions, registration, disclosure and certification rules for token issuers, exchanges, permitted payment stablecoins, DeFi protocols, and banks while barring the Federal Reserve from issuing a central bank digital currency for individuals.
Show full summary
- Consumers and retail investors: Platforms must provide clearer, plain English disclosures about token economics, custody, and insolvency treatment and must offer educational materials before holding or trading digital assets.
- Banks, exchanges, and market intermediaries: Banks and credit unions could offer custody, staking, payments, and related services under supervisor oversight and exchanges must segregate customer assets and use qualified digital asset custodians.
- Developers, DeFi protocols, and NFT creators: The bill creates safe harbors for software developers, a Micro-Innovation Sandbox for small firms (≤25 employees, ≤$10 million revenue), and an NFT safe harbor unless the token functions as an investment contract.
*Would authorize $30 million annually for FinCEN for FY2026–2030, increasing federal outlays by $30 million per year during that period.*
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
29 provisions identified: 10 benefits, 3 costs, 16 mixed.
Banks could offer more crypto services
If enacted, banks and many credit unions would be allowed to use digital assets and blockchains for services they already offer. They could provide custody, support staking, make loans backed by digital assets, run payments, operate nodes, offer wallet software, and facilitate trading and market‑making within limits. Nonfungible tokens would be excluded. Regulators would keep full supervision and existing legal limits.
Easier crypto capital raises with limits
Issuers would be able to raise money without full registration under set caps. Key limits include up to $50,000,000 per year for up to four years or 10% of the asset’s total value, with a $200,000,000 total cap. Some buyers could not own over 10% after a sale, and issuers must plan for the blockchain to reach maturity within four years. Public disclosures would be due at least 30 days before first U.S. sales, with reviewed financials up to $25,000,000 raised and audited above that. Bad‑actor disqualification would apply, and the SEC would finish “Regulation Crypto” rules within 360 days.
New duties and limits for token insiders
If enacted, related and affiliated persons would face holding periods and sale caps. Before maturity, sales would need a 12‑month hold and stay within caps (statutory ranges: 5%–20% in 12 months and 30%–50% of total units). After maturity, the hold is the earlier of 12 months or 3 months post‑certification, with lower caps (statutory ranges: 5%–10%). 10%+ beneficial owners would file reports and insiders would file quarterly sales reports. Profits from disallowed sales could be disgorged within 2 years. Issuers must not make false or misleading required disclosures, but get a safe harbor for labeled forward‑looking statements with clear risk warnings. It would also be unlawful to evade being a digital commodity issuer or to structure deals mainly to issue or sell tokens.
New margin and bankruptcy rules for crypto
The SEC and CFTC would write rules to allow portfolio margining that includes digital commodities with other products. SIPC advances would not cover net equity claims for digital commodities or swaps in these accounts. Many digital‑asset trades and loans with covered brokers would be treated like commodity contracts in bankruptcy, reducing uncertainty. Bank regulators would also set capital rules addressing cross‑product netting within 360 days.
Path to non-security status for tokens
This bill would set a path for some digital tokens to be treated as non-securities if they meet new “network token” rules. The SEC would set tests within one year, and filers could ask to certify a blockchain as “mature” if no one controls it. The SEC would have 60 days to object to a maturity certification, and some other certifications would be approved if the SEC does not object within 90 days. Intermediaries would need a 180‑day public‑info review, and an originator certification, before their token certification takes effect. A “decentralized governance system” would be defined to show when no person or group is in control.
Resales and staking rewards not securities
Many token sales by holders, not the issuer, would not be treated as sales of a security. Broad, low‑value “end user distributions,” including many staking or mining rewards, would also usually not count as securities offers. People who sold certain tokens before the law’s effective date would get a limited safe harbor from some lawsuits, while fraud rules would still apply. The SEC would have 270 days to define which custody and staking services are only administrative, which could change how some providers operate.
Updated SEC rules and fewer state filings
If enacted, the SEC would update rules for digital‑asset custody, trading, records, settlement, and issuer disclosures. Network tokens would be treated as federally covered securities, which would limit many state blue‑sky registration steps. The SEC would follow normal rulemaking and keep anti‑fraud powers.
Protection for self-custody wallets
If enacted, federal agencies would not be able to ban a covered user from self‑custodying digital assets for lawful use starting 360 days after enactment. Treasury would include digital assets in the monetary‑instrument definition and study self‑hosted wallet risks and benefits. Treasury could issue guidance, but it would not require firms to collect personal data about a wallet controller who is not their customer and not a party to the transaction, unless federal law requires it.
Safe harbor for non-controlling developers
If enacted, developers who cannot move users’ assets would not be treated as money transmitters just for publishing software, providing custody‑enabling tools, or supporting infrastructure. This would not protect anyone who helps move criminal proceeds or unlawful transfers. The change would start 360 days after enactment.
Better crypto education for customers
If enacted, the SEC and CFTC would require firms to share clear public education on how digital assets work, key risks, how they differ from traditional markets, and how to spot and report fraud. The agencies would also study retail digital literacy and recommend better disclosures, including for rural and majority‑minority communities. Education materials would start 360 days after enactment, and the study report would be due within 1 year.
Voluntary DeFi cybersecurity and risk studies
NIST would run a voluntary cybersecurity program for DeFi trading protocols. Approved protocols could display a NIST seal, and regulators could treat participation as a sign of good‑faith security practices. Treasury, the Fed, the SEC, and the CFTC would study DeFi’s role and risks within one year and then every four years, and give policy recommendations.
NIST help on post-quantum security
If enacted, NIST would promote voluntary post‑quantum cryptography, share guidance, and offer technical help to high‑risk entities. NIST would seek industry input, report to Congress within 2 years and then every 2 years until 2035, and publish a public lessons‑learned report within 5 years.
Innovation sandboxes and faster coordination
A small‑firm sandbox would let U.S. startups (≤25 employees, ≤$10 million revenue) test projects under caps, with decisions in 180 business days and up to $20 million in customer funds. Agencies could join cross‑border sandboxes and must coordinate through an SEC‑CFTC memorandum. A joint advisory committee on digital assets would launch within 360 days. Agencies would finish key rules within one year. Financial regulators would also set up AI Innovation Labs, reviewing firm applications within 120 days to test AI under approved alternative compliance.
Let firms keep records on blockchains
The SEC would modernize recordkeeping rules so regulated firms can use distributed ledgers. This would aim to lower paperwork and make compliance more efficient over time.
Protections for developers and many NFTs
Developers who only perform technical tasks, like relaying transactions or running nodes, would be shielded from being treated as securities sellers for those tasks. This would start 360 days after enactment and would keep fraud and manipulation laws in force. Many NFT sales would not be treated as securities offers, except for mass‑minted interchangeable series, fractionalized NFTs, or NFTs that grant economic rights. Good‑faith reliance on the NFT safe harbor would be protected, and any SEC denial would take effect no earlier than 60 days after posting.
Tokenized securities treated like originals
A token that represents a security would be treated like the underlying security. The SEC could adapt how rules are met to fit the technology and would study tokenized securities and custody within 360 days. Anti‑fraud and anti‑manipulation rules would still apply.
No interest on payment stablecoins
If enacted, covered firms would be barred from paying interest or yield just for holding payment stablecoins. Activity-based rewards like rebates or loyalty points would still be allowed if not the same as bank interest. Agencies would write rules within 1 year to list allowed rewards. Firms fixing a violation within 90 days could get a safe harbor if it is not a repeat.
Crypto brokers must add AML checks
If enacted, digital commodity brokers, dealers, and some exchanges would be covered by the Bank Secrecy Act. They would need AML programs, customer ID checks, suspicious-activity reporting, recordkeeping, and OFAC sanctions compliance. Treasury/FinCEN would tailor rules to firm size and complexity. These rules would start 360 days after enactment.
Who counts as insiders and affiliates
The bill would define who is a “related person” or an “affiliated person” of a digital‑asset issuer. It would cover founders; executives and directors in the past 12 months; recent promoters, advisors, and consultants; and people with rights to 1% or more (related person) or 5% or more (affiliated person) of the tokens from the issuer or its agents. Decentralized governance systems would be excluded. These definitions would decide who faces extra limits and reporting.
If your crypto broker fails
If enacted, digital commodities would be excluded from SIPA, so SIPA would not protect those assets at a failed broker. Bankruptcy law would count certain digital commodities and ancillary assets held for customers as customer property. The SEC would require brokers to give written insolvency disclosures before and periodically after holding your digital assets. Disclosures must explain how treatment differs from securities and cash.
New rules for crypto kiosks
If enacted, kiosk operators would register locations with Treasury within 90 days and keep them updated every 90 days. You would see clear fee and fraud warnings and get a receipt with details like the transaction hash. New customers would need to confirm any $500+ transaction and wait 72 hours before a send to a wallet. New customers would face a $3,500 per 24-hour limit until rules change. Operators must keep anti-fraud policies, a full-time compliance officer (not the CEO, owning 10% or less), and live customer service.
Temporary holds on crypto withdrawals
If enacted, certain firms could pause your digital-asset withdrawal or conversion for up to 30 days. An agency request could extend the pause up to 150 more days. Firms acting in good faith would get a shield from private lawsuits and would try to notify you unless it harms an investigation. Firms must keep records for 3 years.
When these new rules would start
If enacted, most changes would start 360 days after enactment. Any part that needs a rulemaking would start later: the later of 360 days after enactment or 60 days after the final rule is published.
Stronger fight against illicit crypto flows
If enacted, Treasury would lead a national strategy against international digital‑asset illicit finance within 270 days. A Treasury‑chaired working group would study risks and propose actions, with reports over four years. Treasury would report on U.S.‑dependent offshore stablecoins starting by June 30 of the second calendar year after enactment and then every four years (up to three reports). A five‑year pilot would let agencies and selected private firms securely share information on illicit finance, with liability protections. Treasury could block or set conditions on some cross‑border transfers tied to digital‑asset money laundering.
CDBG grants shift to faster-growing areas
If enacted, HUD would change Community Development Block Grants based on housing growth. Places below the median growth rate would lose 10% of their grant. Higher‑growth places, including areas growing 4% or more, would get bonus funds from those cuts. Changes would start in the third full fiscal year after enactment and last through FY2043. HUD would publish a yearly list of gains and cuts.
New rules for DeFi trading platforms
Digital asset intermediaries would need risk checks before using DeFi trading protocols. Checks would cover money‑laundering, sanctions, fraud, manipulation, operations, and cybersecurity, with plain‑English risk notices to customers. People or groups that control some non‑decentralized DeFi protocols would need to follow tailored securities‑law and anti‑money‑laundering rules. Treasury and the SEC would write these rules.
Stronger AML rules and FinCEN funding
Treasury would issue sanctions and anti‑money‑laundering guidance for distributed‑ledger messaging systems within 360 days. Treasury would also set coordinated, risk‑based AML exam standards for financial institutions active in digital assets. FinCEN would receive $30 million each year from FY2026 through FY2030 to support digital‑asset policy and enforcement.
Studies on NFTs and foreign firms
If enacted, the GAO would study NFTs, including how they are made, used, stored, and the risks and benefits, and publish a report within 1 year. GAO would also study risks from foreign digital‑asset intermediaries that serve U.S. persons where anti‑money‑laundering rules are weaker, and report to Congress within 1 year with recommendations.
Stablecoin terms aligned with GENIUS Act
The bill would use the GENIUS Act’s definitions for “permitted payment stablecoin” and its issuers. This would align which stablecoins and issuers get special treatment under this bill. The exact impact would depend on the GENIUS Act’s final rules.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Hill, J. French [R-AR-2]
AR • R
Cosponsors
Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15]
PA • R
Sponsored 5/29/2025
Rep. Craig, Angie [D-MN-2]
MN • D
Sponsored 5/29/2025
Rep. Emmer, Tom [R-MN-6]
MN • R
Sponsored 5/29/2025
Rep. Johnson, Dusty [R-SD-At Large]
SD • R
Sponsored 5/29/2025
Rep. Davis, Donald G. [D-NC-1]
NC • D
Sponsored 5/29/2025
Rep. Steil, Bryan [R-WI-1]
WI • R
Sponsored 5/29/2025
Rep. Torres, Ritchie [D-NY-15]
NY • D
Sponsored 5/29/2025
Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8]
OH • R
Sponsored 5/29/2025
Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5]
NJ • D
Sponsored 6/2/2025
Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]
MI • R
Sponsored 6/5/2025
Rep. Nunn, Zachary [R-IA-3]
IA • R
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]
NY • R
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Meuser, Daniel [R-PA-9]
PA • R
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1]
GA • R
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Moore, Riley M. [R-WV-2]
WV • R
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Begich, Nicholas J. [R-AK-At Large]
AK • R
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. McDonald Rivet, Kristen [D-MI-8]
MI • D
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13]
MI • D
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Messmer, Mark B. [R-IN-8]
IN • R
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Bresnahan, Robert P. [R-PA-8]
PA • R
Sponsored 6/20/2025
Rep. Stevens, Haley M. [D-MI-11]
MI • D
Sponsored 6/23/2025
Roll Call Votes
senate vote • 9/15/2026
On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed H.R. 3633
Yes: 49 • No: 50
house vote • 7/17/2025
On Passage
Yes: 294 • No: 134