A revised version of the CLARITY Act is making its way in the news, with text posted on Senator Cynthia Lummis’ website. It would direct the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and Treasury. This version would determine whether people or coordinated groups controlling “non-decentralized finance trading protocols” must comply with securities, commodities, and anti-money-laundering requirements.
The revised draft arrives ahead of a procedural Senate vote scheduled for Sept. 15, which requires 60 votes to advance. This is proposed legislation, not enacted law, and the outcome of next week’s cloture vote remains unresolved.
This is a proposal that draws the regulatory line around identifiable human control rather than around the existence of code or a distributed ledger.
A protocol could fall within scope if its functionality, operation, or rules can be materially altered by a person or coordinated group. It could also be in scope if its controllers can restrict users, or if its transactions aren’t governed solely by transparent, pre-established code.
Software and distributed ledger systems themselves would not be required to register in their own capacity, according to the bill’s unresolved treatment of decentralized protocols.
This updated Clarity Act text reflects bipartisan hard work over August—specifying when decentralized-in-name-only DeFi protocols must register with the CFTC and limiting the DeFi provisions to spot and cash transactions, in response to Native American concerns about prediction…
— Senator Cynthia Lummis (@SenLummis) September 10, 2026
Sign Up With Mexc To Trade Crypto This Bullrun
CLARITY Act News: The Sixty-Vote Math and the Unresolved Disputes
The Sept. 15 vote is procedural, a motion to proceed rather than final passage, but it still requires 60 senators, meaning Republicans need Democratic votes to keep the bill alive. Disagreements over ethics provisions, anti-money-laundering protections, and stablecoin rewards have continued into this stage of negotiation. On Aug. 20, Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego warned against holding a vote before those disputes were resolved, cautioning that a fast vote does not guarantee the intended result.
Crypto Council for Innovation CEO Ji Hun Kim described the vote as a pivotal moment for digital assets, innovation, and American leadership, and said the U.S. needs a framework pairing consumer protections with business-conduct standards. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said the bill was ready for a yes vote, telling CNBC that Coinbase’s must-have issues had been resolved even as ethics negotiations remained active.
Notably, the ethics section in the newly released text remained largely unchanged from the prior draft, despite being one of the central points of contention. More on the latest CLARITY Act news is available via recent coverage of the CLARITY Act’s legislative status.
Source: Crypto Council for Innovation
Market Intelligence: Crypto Analyst Predicts Best New Crypto to Hodl
SEC and CFTC Rulemaking: How the Control Test Would Work
U.S. Congress Pexel
Under the proposal, the SEC and CFTC would develop activity-based rules covering registration, conduct, disclosure, recordkeeping, and supervision for controllers of covered protocols. Treasury would separately determine how existing Bank Secrecy Act obligations apply to those same controllers. Notably, participation in an incident-response or security council would not, by itself, establish control over a protocol.
This division of labor mirrors broader questions about how the legislation could split oversight between the SEC and CFTC.
We suspect the practical effect of this framework is to push protocols with admin keys, upgradeable contracts, or concentrated governance toward a binary choice: further decentralize, or accept the compliance burden the bill assigns to controllers. That inference is not stated in the bill text itself and should not be read as a prediction of how any specific protocol would be classified.
If the measure does not advance past Tuesday’s vote, Armstrong has said the SEC and CFTC could instead pursue rulemaking and innovation exemptions using their existing authority – leaving the underlying control-based question open regardless of the legislative outcome.
next
Disclaimer: Coinspeaker is committed to providing unbiased and transparent reporting. This article aims to deliver accurate and timely information but should not be taken as financial or investment advice. Since market conditions can change rapidly, we encourage you to verify information on your own and consult with a professional before making any decisions based on this content.
Daniel Frances is a technical writer and Web3 educator specializing in macroeconomics and DeFi mechanics. A crypto native since 2017, Daniel leverages his background in on-chain analytics to author evidence-based reports and deep-dive guides. He holds certifications from The Blockchain Council, and is dedicated to providing “information gain” that cuts through market hype to find real-world blockchain utility.