According to media sources, the United States Senate was unable to move forward on the encryption market structure bill before the August recess, while the SEC was ready to vote on a framework of rules for the distribution of encrypted assets on 14 August. If the proposal is accepted for public comment, the way the United States secures the project may be rewritten by the regulator, rather than waiting for Congress to legislate.

Senate vote postponed until September

The CLARITY Bill was originally considered to be an important development in United States encrypted market structure legislation. The bill was passed in the House of Representatives in July 2025 and passed through the Senate Banking Commission in May 2026, but has since stalled.

According to the article, the Senate did not arrange for a final vote before the August recess, and the meeting was resumed on 14 September, while the remaining operational time for the current session was limited. The Polymarket article on the probability that the Act was passed in 2026 also shows a marked fall from the height of the year.

The SEC proposes three distribution paths.

At the heart of this vote is the question of whether to issue a proposal for a rule called “Regulation Cripto” and to enter into the formal consultation process. If adopted, the public may submit comments in the following months, the SEC revises the text and the final version is expected to be re-recorded.

  • Initial exemption: the project can finance up to $5 million over 4 years
  • Finance waiver: upper limit of $75 million per year for more mature projects
  • Safe harbour path: Decentralized fully, currency exit security recognition

Of these, start-up projects could be replaced by white papers to audit financial statements; more mature projects would need to provide audited financial data and regular disclosures. According to the article, the third “safe harbour” arrangement is of the greatest interest as it relates to when a token may no longer be considered a security.

Regulatory attribution remains unresolved

However, this set of rules does not answer the core question that the CLARITY Act was trying to address, namely, which digital assets should be regulated by the SEC and which should fall under the jurisdiction of the CFTC. This uncertainty remains with respect to projects in border zones.

The article also noted that formal rules were stronger than supervisory staff guidelines, but still weaker than parliamentary legislation. If future SEC leadership shifts, rules may still be reactivated and the policy volatility facing industry will not disappear.

Procedurally, this vote was only to initiate rule-making, not directly to give effect to the new rules. However, in the face of continued delays in parliamentary legislation, regulators have begun to build a framework for encrypted distribution with existing mandates. For the United States encryption industry, the public consultation phase in the coming months may have a more realistic impact than the short-term advancement of the bill.