La apuesta de 60 mil millones de dólares de Coinbase: La Ley CLARITY y la lucha por el futuro regulatorio de las criptomonedas

The legislative battle over the CLARITY Act is not a theoretical debate about financial regulation. For Coinbase, it is a direct defense of a core, high-margin revenue stream worth an estimated $55 to $60 billion to its shareholders. This is the financial magnitude of the company's strategic bet on the USDC stablecoin ecosystem.

The numbers underscore the scale of this asset. In the first quarter of 2025 alone, Coinbase earned roughly $300 million in distribution payments from Circle, a figure that exceeded Circle's own total net revenue for the period. This wasn't a one-off; the stablecoin contribution was already a powerhouse, delivering nearly $247 million in Q4 2024. The income is generated through a dual engine: a 50% share of reserve income from USDC balances held on Coinbase's platform, and a 50% split of the Circle Reserve Fund's earnings off-platform. The latter, in particular, operates at nearly 100% margin, providing a pure profit windfall.

This financial exposure is not just about revenue. It is anchored in a significant equity stake. Coinbase holds 8.5 million shares in Circle, a position valued at over $1.6 billion. The company's entire business model has been reoriented around this partnership, using Circle-funded incentives to drive user growth at effectively zero or negative cost. The proposed CLARITY Act provision, which seeks to ban stablecoin issuers from offering incentives, directly threatens this model by closing a loophole that the banking industry is now trying to plug.

The bottom line is clear. The CLARITY Act debate is a high-stakes wager on the future of a $60 billion economic ecosystem. For Coinbase, rejecting the bill is not a political preference; it is a necessary act of self-preservation for a critical, high-margin asset that has become the engine of its growth.

The Legislative Battlefield: Banking's 'Deposit Siphon' Fears vs. Crypto's Innovation

The debate over the CLARITY Act is a clash between two visions for the financial system. On one side, the banking industry is mobilizing to close a perceived regulatory gap, driven by a deep-seated fear of a "deposit siphon." On the other, crypto innovators like Coinbase argue that the same rules that would stifle their growth are essential for maintaining U.S. competitiveness in a global digital economy.

The specific battleground is a loophole in the recently passed GENIUS Act. That law bars stablecoin issuers themselves from providing interest or yield to holders. Yet it does not explicitly prohibit third-party platforms-like crypto exchanges-from offering incentives to users who hold those stablecoins. This is the precise mechanism Coinbase has leveraged to drive growth and generate its $60 billion revenue stream. The banking sector now seeks to close this gap via the CLARITY Act, arguing that yield-bearing stablecoin accounts on platforms like Coinbase could divert trillions of dollars in deposits away from traditional banks, destabilizing the core of the financial system.

This is not a new fear. For over a decade, regulators have struggled to establish a unified framework for crypto, resulting in what many describe as "regulation by enforcement." The current patchwork of agency actions and guidance has created legal uncertainty that has constrained traditional finance participation and pushed innovation abroad. The passage of the GENIUS Act was a step toward clarity, but the debate now centers on whether the CLARITY Act will deepen that clarity or introduce a new layer of friction. The banking industry's push to regulate platform-based incentives is part of a broader effort to bring crypto under the same regulatory umbrella as traditional banking products, treating them as potential substitutes for deposits.

Viewed another way, the conflict is about the future of financial innovation. Proponents of the status quo, including Coinbase, see platform-based rewards as a legitimate feature of crypto markets, distinct from traditional bank deposits. They warn that reopening the debate on stablecoin yields would inject uncertainty at a critical moment, as adoption ramps up globally. As Galaxy Digital's CEO recently argued, rolling back these elements would weaken U.S. innovation and competitiveness. The Senate Banking Committee's upcoming markup will test whether the bill's broader goals of market clarity can survive the pressure to close this specific loophole.

The bottom line is that this is a high-stakes negotiation over the rules of a new financial frontier. The outcome will determine not just the fate of a single revenue stream, but the very architecture of how digital assets are regulated and whether the U.S. leads or lags in the global race for crypto dominance.

Financial Impact and Valuation Scenarios

The legislative outcome will directly stress-test Coinbase's financial model. The core risk is to a high-margin, recurring revenue stream that has become the engine of growth. A ban on stablecoin incentives would materially reduce the 64% year-over-year growth in subscription and services revenue, which was driven by the USDC ecosystem. This isn't a minor fluctuation; it would cut off a primary driver of expansion, forcing a reassessment of the entire growth trajectory.

The contingent nature of the $60 billion valuation is now stark. That figure, estimated by JPMorgan, is not a static asset but a forward-looking assessment of the Circle partnership's total economic upside. Restrictions on platform-based incentives would trigger a reassessment, likely leading to a downward revision of that premium. The market has priced in a future where this revenue stream continues to scale; a policy shift would challenge that assumption, creating immediate valuation pressure.

Coinbase's financial strength provides a critical buffer, but it does not eliminate the strategic risk. The company enters this debate with robust resources, including $9.3 billion in USD resources and $3.3 billion in 2024 adjusted EBITDA. This balance sheet allows it to weather uncertainty and fund its lobbying efforts. Yet, the $60 billion strategic asset is not a cash reserve. It is a growth asset whose value is tied to regulatory permission. The company's financial health mitigates the immediate liquidity threat but does not insulate it from the long-term erosion of its most valuable revenue engine.

The bottom line is that while Coinbase has the resources to fight, the stakes are high. The policy debate is a direct referendum on the company's most profitable business line. A legislative win for the banking industry would force a painful recalibration of both the profit-and-loss statement and the market's perception of the company's future.

Catalysts, Risks, and What to Watch

The legislative clock is now ticking. The immediate catalyst is the Senate Banking Committee markup scheduled for this Thursday. This session will test whether the bill's broader goals of market clarity can survive the intense pressure to close the specific loophole that Coinbase and other crypto firms rely on. The outcome of this markup will set the tone for the entire legislative process, determining if the bill moves forward with or without a compromise on stablecoin incentives.

The primary risk is a legislative compromise that restricts third-party rewards. While the banking industry seeks to close the GENIUS Act loophole, a final bill could impose new rules that materially limit how Coinbase and other platforms offer stablecoin incentives. This is the precise trigger that could force a strategic retreat. As of today, Coinbase may reconsider its support for the bill if it restricts these rewards, a stance that could stall the entire CLARITY Act. The company's position is clear: platform-based incentives are a legitimate feature of crypto markets, not a threat to traditional banking. A compromise that forces Coinbase to capitulate would not only undermine its core revenue model but also signal a major policy victory for the banking sector, potentially derailing the bill's momentum.

Key variables to watch are twofold. First, monitor any concessions on the loophole during the markup. Will the final text merely require enhanced disclosure, or will it introduce new restrictions like limiting rewards to transaction-based activity or mandating an OCC bank charter? The latter would severely hamper Coinbase's ability to offer competitive yields. Second, watch for evidence of a broader industry coalition forming to protect the current model. The debate is not just between Coinbase and banks; it involves a range of crypto firms and trade groups. Their unified stance will be critical in resisting a carve-out that could fracture the bill's support.

The bottom line is a high-stakes, time-sensitive negotiation. The Senate Banking Committee's markup this Thursday is the first major test. The risk of a compromise that forces Coinbase to withdraw its support is real and could stall the bill. Investors must watch for the specific language on stablecoin rewards and the strength of the industry coalition defending the status quo. The outcome will determine not just the fate of a $60 billion revenue stream, but the regulatory architecture for the entire U.S. crypto industry.