The CLARITY Bill, promoted by the United States Congress, is trying to address a core issue that has been in the encryption industry for many years: whether digital assets should be regulated by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The article shows that the bill was approved by both parties in the House of Representatives in July 2025 and by a key Senate committee in May 2026.

Regulatory attribution is long unclear.

For a long time, the United States regulatory boundaries for encrypted assets have been unclear. The SEC prefers to treat most of the tokens as securities and to promote regulation on the basis of enforcement actions, while the CTC regards bitcoin and some of the tokens as commodities. The parallel set of calibres perpetuates the uncertainty of projectors, trading platforms and developers and also drives some enterprises to shift their operations to more well-regulated overseas markets.

The bill is to be administered in three categories:

At the heart of the CLARITY Act is the inclusion of digital assets in the three statutory categories and corresponding to different regulatory frameworks.

  • Digital goods: regulated by CFTC
  • Investment contract assets: supervised by SEC
  • Licence-based stabilization currency: application of a separate framework

Under this design, digital goods are mainly network tokens that are highly decentralised, have practical uses and are not controlled by a single subject, and Bitcoin is considered the most typical case. For tokens closer to the financing instrument, information disclosure and investor protection requirements under the securities law are still applicable.

The tokens can be converted as the network matures.

One of the more focused designs of the bill is to allow tokens to change regulatory classification in the course of project development. According to the article, many encryption projects were more like securities at an early stage, as the project was led by a centralized team, and investors were also primarily betting on the capacity of the team to execute; however, as the network became dispersed and the tokens began to take on real functions, its attributes might be closer to commodities.

This means that some tokens may initially be subject to SEC regulation, but may be transferred to CFTC regulation after meeting the decentrization and practicality criteria set by the Act. This arrangement is intended to distinguish between early financing of the project and the operation of the network at a later stage, avoiding the consistent application of the same regulatory logic to the same asset at different stages.

Client financial segregation is written down.

In addition to the regulatory division of labour, the bill incorporates compliance requirements for platform and market participants, with a focus on reducing exposure to past industry risk incidents. The articles mention that the requirements include customer financial segregation, conflict of interest disclosure and a range of compliance standards.

In terms of progress, the bill is closer to landing than most previously encrypted market structures in the United States. Following the Senate and the President ' s signing process, the United States encryption industry ' s long-standing reliance on law enforcement and litigation to define borders may shift to a clearer statutory framework.