For years, digital asset legislation in the U.S. has followed a familiar script: hearings with no follow-through, regulatory turf wars, and an industry stuck in limbo. That changed recently, as two significant bills – the Senate’s GENIUS Act and the House’s CLARITY Act – passed their first major votes with broad bipartisan support.

This is more than a policy update – it’s the strongest sign yet that the U.S. is prepared to define a functional regulatory framework for stablecoins (a type of cryptocurrency that offers price stability; read more about them here) and tokenized markets. The digital dollar conversation is moving from theoretical to actionable, and that shift carries real implications for capital allocation, infrastructure, and investment strategy.

Key Takeaways

• Congress is making meaningful progress on stablecoin legislation, with bipartisan support behind the GENIUS and CLARITY Acts.
• These bills would give U.S. banks the ability to issue fully reserved, regulated stablecoins, creating new fee and lending opportunities.
• Circle is well-positioned, with USDC potentially moving from the regulatory grey zone to compliant infrastructure.
• U.S. exchanges could benefit from reduced uncertainty and valuation rerating.
• If passed, this legislation would signal a turning point in anchoring the digital dollar’s role in the global financial system.

Why Now: Political Will Meets Market Pressure

The sudden alignment in Washington isn’t driven by enthusiasm for innovation so much as a response to pressure. After a wave of high-profile crypto bankruptcies and stablecoin de-peggings, lawmakers were faced with a reality they could no longer ignore. A $160 billion stablecoin market has already embedded itself in everything from decentralized finance to global remittances.

At the same time, the European Union’s MiCA regime is coming into force, introducing firm rules for euro-backed tokens. The idea that dollar-denominated stablecoins could migrate offshore, or worse, be replaced entirely in global flows, has created urgency. The administration’s April executive order, which encouraged agencies to support dollar-backed payment stablecoins, gave cover for both parties to act. That shift in tone is what helped push GENIUS and CLARITY through their early committee stages with strong support.

What the GENIUS and CLARITY Acts Would Do

The GENIUS Act focuses on stablecoins. It would formally define payment stablecoins as fully reserved, non-security assets. Issuers would be required to hold high-quality liquid reserves, provide monthly attestations, and publish daily transparency reports. The bill also confirms the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s authority to approve bank-issued stablecoins and proposes a federal charter for qualified non-bank issuers.

The CLARITY Act takes on the broader market structure. Its core idea is to assign regulatory responsibility based on functionality. Tokens that meet certain decentralisation thresholds would fall under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Others would remain under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s purview. It’s a framework designed to address the fragmentation that has plagued the space and to offer something closer to legal certainty for investors and institutions alike.

Together, these bills offer a measured approach: treat stablecoins as digital cash equivalents subject to familiar prudential rules, while placing speculative or investment-grade tokens under the securities regime. That balance is what makes this round of legislation feel more viable than previous efforts.

For Banks: A New Opportunity to Compete

Traditional banks have long shown interest in blockchain rails, but most have hesitated due to regulatory ambiguity. With the GENIUS Act, the door opens to fully reserved digital dollars issued by U.S. financial institutions under a clear legal framework. That means potential revenue from custody, wallet services, instant settlement rails, and white-labelled stablecoins.

More importantly, there’s a capital efficiency angle. Because fully reserved stablecoins would sit off the issuing bank’s balance sheet, they wouldn’t trigger leverage ratio penalties under Basel III. That frees up capacity for more profitable lending without the capital drag. Of course, entering this space will require operational upgrades: real-time risk management, on-chain AML compliance, and round-the-clock infrastructure. But for banks already investing in digital transformation, the incentive to move is growing.

Circle: Positioned to Capitalize

Among the current players, Circle Internet Financial appears best positioned to benefit from this legislative shift. Fresh off a successful IPO, the company could see its flagship product, USDC, granted formal recognition as a compliant payment stablecoin. That would eliminate the largest legal overhang in its business model and open new partnership opportunities.

Banks that want to participate in stablecoin issuance without building infrastructure from scratch could leverage Circle’s APIs, reserve management, and compliance stack. Meanwhile, the economics remain attractive. Every dollar of USDC is backed by short-term Treasuries. At current yields, Circle earns approximately $510 million annually for every $10 billion in float, before accounting for transaction fees or B2B services.

If GENIUS passes, Circle isn’t just a stablecoin issuer – it becomes a key vendor for tokenized dollar infrastructure.

What This Means for U.S. Exchanges

Public exchanges like Coinbase have operated under a persistent regulatory overhang. This has weighed on valuations, keeping them well below fintech peers in terms of forward earnings multiples. The CLARITY Act could change that dynamic. By offering clearer market structure and token classification rules, it could materially reduce the cost of equity for U.S.-regulated platforms.

Analysts already expect a rerating if CLARITY advances, not just for Coinbase, but for other firms like Kraken and Gemini that may now consider reopening IPO discussions. For exchanges that already dominate stablecoin trading pairs – especially on-shore ones like USDC – this shift could translate into real revenue growth and improved capital access.

Global Implications: Jurisdictional Edge in a Tokenized Future

Stablecoins processed over $11 trillion in on-chain volume last year, rivalling traditional payment networks like Visa. That figure alone underscores the significance of legal jurisdiction. Where stablecoins are domiciled will influence everything from reserve management to audit requirements and even liquidity routing.

Europe’s MiCA framework, while a regulatory milestone, places strict limits on non-bank-issued stablecoins. That creates a window of opportunity for the U.S. If Congress acts quickly and decisively, the country could become the preferred jurisdiction for dollar-based digital transactions – not just for domestic use, but for global trade and asset settlement as well.

Final Thoughts: A Real Shot at Digital Dollar Leadership

The U.S. has had more than a few false starts when it comes to crypto regulation. But this time, the focus is narrower, and the momentum is real. Rather than attempting to legislate the entire crypto ecosystem, lawmakers are targeting the most systemically relevant use case: digitized dollars that serve as a cash equivalent.

If passed, these bills won’t just create a new regulatory perimeter. They’ll redefine what institutional participation in digital assets can look like. For banks, exchanges, fintech platforms, and asset managers, this could mark the beginning of a new chapter – one where tokenized dollars become a core part of financial infrastructure rather than a fringe innovation.

For investors, it’s not just about regulatory clarity. It’s about identifying where durable infrastructure is being built and where early positioning can translate into long-term advantage.

Strong convictions. Loosely held.

— Nick Mersch, CFA

The content of this document is for informational purposes only and is not being provided in the context of an offering of any securities described herein, nor is it a recommendation or solicitation to buy, hold or sell any security. The information is not investment advice, nor is it tailored to the needs or circumstances of any investor. Information contained in this document is not, and under no circumstances is it to be construed as, an offering memorandum, prospectus, advertisement or public offering of securities. No securities commission or similar regulatory authority has reviewed this document, and any representation to the contrary is an offence. Information contained in this document is believed to be accurate and reliable; however, we cannot guarantee that it is complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.

Commissions, trailing commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with investment funds. Please read the prospectus before investing. If the securities are purchased or sold on a stock exchange, you may pay more or receive less than the current net asset value. Investment funds are not guaranteed; their values change frequently, and past performance may not be repeated. Certain statements in this document are forward-looking. Crypto assets can be extremely volatile, and there is no guarantee that the amount invested will be returned to you.

Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend on or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “estimate” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are, by their nature, based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained in this document are based upon what Purpose Investments and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, Purpose Investments and the portfolio manager cannot assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on the FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed, that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.