La Ley CLARITY y las recompensas en stablecoins: Un cruce de caminos regulatorios para las criptomonedas y los bancos

The CLARITY Act of 2025 and its complementary framework, the GENIUS Act, represent a pivotal shift in the regulatory landscape for digital assets, particularly stablecoins. These legislative efforts aim to clarify jurisdictional boundaries between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) while addressing systemic risks in the stablecoin market. For investors in both crypto and traditional banking sectors, the interplay between these laws and their implementation presents a complex mix of risks and opportunities.

Regulatory Clarity and the Three-Tiered Framework

The CLARITY Act categorizes digital assets into three distinct classes: digital commodities, investment contract assets, and permitted payment stablecoins according to the framework. This framework assigns regulatory oversight to the CFTC and SEC based on asset type. For instance, digital commodities-assets intrinsically linked to blockchain functionality-are under CFTC jurisdiction, while investment contracts fall under SEC oversight as defined. Permitted payment stablecoins, which maintain a stable value relative to a fiat currency, are governed by the GENIUS Act, which mandates 1:1 reserve backing with high-quality liquid assets and regular audits according to regulatory analysis.

This tripartite classification reduces regulatory ambiguity but introduces new challenges. For example, the Senate's draft of the CLARITY Act proposes a broader definition of digital commodities, emphasizing decentralization and disintermediation as reported. This could expand the CFTC's authority over stablecoins, creating friction with the House version, which explicitly excludes stablecoins from the digital commodity category according to congressional records. Such discrepancies highlight the risk of regulatory arbitrage, where market participants exploit differences in definitions to avoid compliance costs as noted.

Stablecoin Rewards and Systemic Risks

A critical point of contention is the regulation of stablecoin rewards. The GENIUS Act prohibits insured depository institutions from offering interest or rewards on stablecoins to prevent destabilizing deposits from traditional banking systems according to the American Bankers Association. However, affiliated entities of stablecoin issuers-such as fintech platforms-have raised concerns about circumventing these rules by offering indirect incentives as highlighted. The American Bankers Association has urged Congress to extend these prohibitions to affiliated partners, arguing that such loopholes could erode trust in the banking system according to their statement.

For investors, this regulatory tug-of-war creates uncertainty. If the Senate's stricter approach prevails, stablecoin issuers may face higher compliance costs, potentially stifling innovation. Conversely, a more lenient framework could spur adoption but increase systemic risks, such as bank runs if stablecoins divert deposits away from traditional institutions as observed.

Opportunities for Institutional Adoption

Despite these risks, the CLARITY and GENIUS Acts are fostering institutional adoption. By aligning U.S. regulations with international frameworks like the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) directive according to regulatory analysis, the U.S. is positioning itself as a competitive hub for digital finance. For example, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has proposed a rule to streamline the approval process for insured banks issuing payment stablecoins under the GENIUS Act according to agency guidance. This could enable traditional banks to diversify revenue streams through stablecoin-related services, such as custodial solutions and cross-border payments as detailed.

Moreover, the CLARITY Act's provisional registration regime for digital commodity exchanges and intermediaries allows market participants to operate while rules are finalized according to congressional analysis. This "expedited registration" model reduces entry barriers for crypto-native firms, potentially accelerating market growth. However, it also raises concerns about inadequate safeguards during the interim period as noted.

Risks for Traditional Banks

Traditional banks face dual pressures from these reforms. On one hand, the GENIUS Act's reserve requirements and audit mandates could increase operational costs for stablecoin-issuing banks according to regulatory analysis. On the other, the prohibition on stablecoin rewards may limit their ability to compete with fintech platforms offering yield-generating products according to industry reports. For instance, if a bank's affiliated subsidiary is barred from offering interest on stablecoins, it could lose customers to unregulated platforms that exploit regulatory gray areas as observed.

Additionally, the Senate's emphasis on customer protection-such as segregating customer assets and enforcing antitrust rules-could impose stricter compliance burdens on banks operating in the stablecoin space as reported. While these measures enhance trust, they may also reduce profit margins for institutions lacking the infrastructure to meet heightened standards according to financial analysis.

The Path Forward: Reconciliation and Global Alignment

The final form of the CLARITY Act will depend on reconciling the House and Senate versions. The House's focus on jurisdictional clarity and functional definitions contrasts with the Senate's broader regulatory categories and consumer protections according to legal analysis. Investors should monitor this process closely, as the outcome will determine whether the U.S. adopts a "light-touch" or "heavily regulated" approach to stablecoins.

Globally, the U.S. is aligning with trends like the EU's MiCA framework, which emphasizes transparency and consumer safeguards according to regulatory analysis. This alignment could facilitate cross-border compliance for multinational firms but may also intensify competition from jurisdictions with more permissive regimes.

Conclusion: Navigating the Crossroads

For investors, the CLARITY and GENIUS Acts present a regulatory crossroads. While the laws aim to mitigate systemic risks and foster innovation, their implementation remains fraught with uncertainty. Crypto-native investors must weigh the potential for institutional adoption against the risk of overregulation, while traditional banks should assess how to leverage stablecoin opportunities without compromising compliance. As the Senate and House work to reconcile their proposals, the key will be balancing innovation with stability-a challenge that will define the future of digital finance in the U.S.