American crypto law: Proposals multiply in the face of impasse in the Senate

The long-awaited adoption of a legal framework for digital assets in the United States is experiencing a serious setback. If there is consensus on the ambition for coherent crypto regulation, the parliamentary reality is much more chaotic. Between divergent interests and political standoffs, negotiations are bogged down in the Senate. The discussions did not come to fruition, despite notable efforts. Meanwhile, players in the crypto industry are trying to save the text by increasing compromises. But the equation remains complex, and the blockage persists.

Give guarantees to banks to save crypto regulation

Crypto industry giants want to prevent the bill from dying in the Senate. To do this, they are now proposing concrete compromises. The key idea: involve community banks morevery influential in certain States. The latter could hold the reserves of stablecoins, or even issue their own tokens via partnerships with platforms like Circle or Paxos. A subtle way of making regulation more “bank-friendly”.

The major point of friction remains the remuneration of stablecoins. Banks believe this would divert deposits from their savings accounts. On the other hand, crypto firms consider this return essential to attract users. A stubborn disagreement, despite the promises of supervision.

A summit between crypto and banks at the White House in early February ended in failure. No convergence. However, discussions continue. As Senator Tim Scott said:

The good news is that both sides remain at the negotiating table […] we will overcome these obstacles and ensure that America becomes the crypto capital of the world.

Faced with the impasse, crypto companies are doubling down on initiatives. They know that this text could determine the regulatory future of the sector in the United States.

In the United States, crypto rhymes (again) with political standoff

The crypto bill illustrates a deep political divide within the Senate. The text passed the House stage in 2025, but senators are struggling to agree. Two versions are circulating: one, Republican, from the Agriculture Committee; the other, more strict, coming from the banking committee. It will be necessary to merge them and convince at least seven Democrats to move the process forward.

The main blockage? The fear of a “bank run” orchestrated by platforms capable of remunerating savings better than banks. An argument often put forward by traditional institutions, which fear capital flight. However, the president of the banking commission minimized this risk by ensuring that no leakage of deposits was to be expected.

But this declaration was not enough to change positions.

Behind the scenes, one observation stands out: the future of crypto regulation in the USA could well be played out in informal negotiations, far from the spotlight. And in this struggle for influence, community banks become the ideal lever. Less powerful but close to the ground, they could make the link between technological innovation and financial security.

What to remember in 5 points

• The United States is trying to adopt a law structuring the crypto market, but the Senate remains divided;
• The role of community banks is central in the new compromises proposed by the crypto industry;
• The remuneration of stablecoins remains the crux of the disagreement between banks and crypto platforms;
• Two versions of the project are opposed: Agriculture vs. Bank, with a difficult merger ahead;
• The text needs the support of 7 Democrats to hope to pass before the end of the current mandate.

While the crypto debate is agitating the Senate, another event is shaking the American markets: the appointment of Kevin Warsh as head of the Federal Reserve. Chosen by Trump, this conservative profile reassures some… but worries Wall Street. In an already tense climate, this new situation could weigh heavily on future economic and financial decisions.