With House Financial Services Committee members voting to advance stablecoin legislation, Congress has moved closer to its goal of passing a stablecoin regulatory framework into law. The vote saw Democrats split on the measure with six committee members backing the bill despite opposition from senior panel members, including the committee’s top Democrat – Rep. Maxine Waters of California. The bill will now head to the House floor, but a vote could still be months away.
The bill’s advancement in the House now means both chambers have moved stablecoin legislation out of committee to their respective chamber floors, but the two texts still have differences. The most significant split continues to be on the role that state regulators will play, with both bills creating a role for them. However, the Senate’s measure sets a $10 billion threshold above which firms would be required to be overseen by federal regulators. One of the Senate’s leading sponsors, Republican Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, suggested an openness to adjusting this number in comments to Politico in February, but no changes were made during the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee’s markup of the bill.
Both bills appear to have paths to passage in their respective chambers, though it is likely an easier lift in the House, given the need only for a simple majority. Still, like last year’s vote to pass the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act, the measure may attract sizable Democratic support. There is likely enough support in the Senate as well, as evidenced by the bipartisan support during the committee markup and other Democrats interested in potentially backing the bill.
The unknown with both bills is when they may receive floor votes. Republican Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, one of the lead sponsors of the Senate’s legislation, told Politico in an interview in early April that the bill could get a vote in the coming weeks. While there may be some optimism behind Hagerty’s comments, this signals lawmakers’ intent to continue moving forward on the bills. The biggest timing challenge at the moment is not finding support for the measures, but Congress’s calendar and the limited floor time. Lawmakers are scheduled to leave on April 11 and not return until April 28, meaning any stablecoin action is unlikely to happen before May. Realistically, passage of stablecoin legislation is unlikely to occur until July or in the fall of this year.
Another factor potentially shaping when these floor votes will occur is whether lawmakers intend to settle their differences before bringing up measures. This type of informal conferencing of legislation is common. Still, it would likely delay the votes, as lawmakers will move to find a compromise bill instead of moving the bills forward. Whether this happens before or after the floor votes is ultimately unimportant, as the time will have to be spent to iron out the differences either way, but when it occurs will determine when the first floor votes happen.
The stablecoin bill’s timeline for passage could face further complications if it is combined with market structure legislation. In a sign of those efforts getting restarted this year, Reps. French Hill (R-Ark.) and Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.), chairs of the House Financial Services Committee and House Agriculture Committee, recently outlined their digital assets legislation framework in an op-ed published by CoinDesk. This release comes ahead of subcommittees in both committees holding hearings to discuss the issue, a sign of the shifting attention in the House. While the House passed FIT21 last year, and could likely do so relatively quickly again this year, the Senate has made minimal progress on similar legislation, and it would likely be a more significant roadblock to tackling both bills in one package.
The advantage of combining the bills for lawmakers is that it tackles all meaningful pending crypto legislation in one go. However, this approach will likely slow the completion of the stablecoin measure, which is seen as the easier lift for lawmakers. Given the comparative lack of progress on market structure legislation, if this were to become the preferred plan, passage of both bills is likely at best a fall agenda item and could slip into 2026.
Currently, there is no consensus on whether to handle the bills together, with Hagerty telling Politico that market structure legislation should be “the next step” after the stablecoin legislation is “across the finish line.” On the other hand, Hill told Politico he wants to move the bills “in conjunction” as it permits lawmakers “to contemplate this issue in its full manner.” While not unsolvable, the split on strategy between chambers could delay progress and ultimately require the White House to step in to put its weight behind one of the approaches.
Read the full article here
