Bessent says SEC and CFTC can fill the Clarity Act gap, but agency rules come with an expiry risk

<p dir="ltr">US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says Washington can still deliver crypto rules without Congress. Speaking at Ripple’s Swell conference, he said the Senate’s failure to pass the Clarity Act was disappointing, but that Treasury would use its convening power to push a regulatory framework forward through agency action with the SEC and CFTC. The catch for investors is durability: rules written by regulators can be rewritten by the next set of regulators.</p><p dir="ltr">What happened</p><p dir="ltr">Bessent described the SEC and CFTC as “great partners” in the effort. He also raised debanking, the practice of financial institutions cutting off services to crypto businesses, sometimes allegedly under regulatory pressure. He said the Clarity Act could have prevented a repeat of that, but that regulatory best practices and protections can still reduce the risk. He also argued that stablecoins will lift demand for the US dollar and Treasuries, making them an important funding source for the government.</p><p dir="ltr">The backdrop is the Senate vote six weeks ago. The Clarity Act failed to advance on September 15 on a 49-50 vote, 11 short of the 60 needed. Because the vote was procedural, the bill was never debated or amended. The two disputes that sank it were ethics rules covering officials’ digital asset holdings and whether stablecoin issuers can offer yield or rewards.</p><p dir="ltr">Why it matters</p><p dir="ltr">The bill would have settled the question that has dogged US crypto for years: which regulator is responsible for which tokens. It would have given the CFTC oversight of decentralized digital commodities while leaving fundraising and investment contracts with the SEC. Without it, the agencies are building the framework piece by piece.</p><p dir="ltr">That work was already underway before Bessent spoke. The SEC proposed Regulation Crypto Assets on August 18, and on September 17 it launched an innovation exemption for tokenized securities venues, while the CFTC sent its crypto market rules to the White House for review. So Bessent’s comments are less a new policy than Treasury putting its weight behind the agency route, with debanking added to the agenda.</p><p dir="ltr">The limitation is permanence. SEC Chair Paul Atkins has himself argued that legislation is still needed for rules a future regulator cannot undo, and agency rules can also face court challenges. JPMorgan said last week that regulator actions partly offset the Clarity setback, but that political and legal risks will remain until Congress passes a market structure law, since a future administration could reverse agency actions.</p><p dir="ltr">What could change the interpretation</p><p dir="ltr">A revived bill would shift the picture quickly. JPMorgan sees the Clarity Act as unlikely to pass this year but possibly returning in 2027. In the other direction, a legal challenge to an SEC or CFTC rule would underline how fragile the agency approach is. It is also worth separating intent from action: Bessent said Treasury could work with the agencies, which is a statement of direction, not a finished rule.</p><p dir="ltr">What to watch next</p><p dir="ltr">The next concrete milestone is the CFTC’s crypto market rules emerging from White House review, followed by the SEC finalising Regulation Crypto Assets. Any Treasury guidance on debanking would be the first tangible sign that Bessent’s new thread is more than rhetoric. Next week’s US midterm elections also matter, as the make-up of the next Congress will shape whether market structure legislation has a realistic path in 2027.</p><p dir="ltr">For readers, the practical takeaway is to treat agency progress as useful but provisional. Clearer rules from regulators can lower near-term uncertainty for exchanges and token issuers, but until Congress acts, part of the regulatory risk premium is likely to stay in the price. Steady agency progress would strengthen the case that the Clarity failure was a delay rather than a dead end. Stalled rules or court fights would weaken it. </p><p dir="ltr"></p> This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.