Coinbase Crashes BANKS!! Crypto Clarity Delayed!
A major rift has emerged within the cryptocurrency industry over proposed federal legislation, with Coinbase taking a controversial stand against a bill that many other crypto leaders support. After the Senate Banking Committee spent months crafting what appeared to be comprehensive crypto legislation, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong's objections disrupted the process—sparking debate about whether the bill protects banking interests or whether Coinbase is acting in its own self-interest.
Brian Armstrong and Coinbase raised significant concerns after reviewing the Senate Banking draft, ultimately declaring they couldn't support the legislation as written. Armstrong identified four major problems: the bill would prevent the SEC from enabling equity market tokenization, impose expansive DeFi restrictions that create presumptive government surveillance of peer-to-peer transactions, subordinate the CFTC to the SEC, and eliminate rewards on stablecoins. The DeFi Education Fund's Amanda Tuminelli conducted analysis highlighting these issues, including Elizabeth Warren's 38 amendments. However, the crypto industry response was far from unified—major players including Ripple, Kraken, and Andreessen Horowitz actually supported the bill, with some critics suggesting Coinbase's opposition stemmed from protecting its own business model rather than broader industry concerns.
The stakes for traditional banks couldn't be higher. With annual deposits generating between $1 trillion and $1.5 trillion in interest income domestically, and over $100 trillion in deposits managed globally, banks view regulatory clarity around stablecoins and crypto as essential to their competitive position. Interestingly, major bank stocks experienced significant declines in mid-January 2026—JP Morgan dropped over 4% following its January 14 earnings report, Bank of America fell nearly 6%, and Wells Fargo took particularly heavy losses. However, these declines were attributed to earnings reactions and broader economic concerns rather than anticipation of legislative outcomes. During Bank of America's earnings call, executives downplayed concerns about stablecoin competition, claiming they'd "be fine" regardless of whether Congress addressed what they termed the "stablecoin loophole."
Trade without limits.
Since 2011, we’ve never had a single security issue — and our liquidity runs deeper than most of the market. Enjoy non-KYC, VPN-friendly trading with up to 500× leverage, 25% lower fees, and a 10% bonus on your first deposit.
It’s time to trade where professionals do.
The lobbying dynamics reveal stark disparities in financial power. While banks and finance spent around $500 million on lobbying, Coinbase invested $2.9 million, with Fair Shake adding perhaps $75 million when including all crypto advocacy efforts. Senators openly discussed the need for "adequate competition with the banks" and acknowledged concerns about preventing "significant outflow of deposits" from traditional financial institutions. Yet the legislative intent remains contested—supporters argue the bill provides necessary regulatory clarity for the industry to thrive, while critics like Coinbase contend it imposes surveillance requirements and restrictions that don't exist in traditional finance. The bill does contain provisions for monitoring peer-to-peer transactions and language specifying protection for "lawful" software development, which critics argue creates concerning ambiguity about what might be deemed unlawful.
Coinbase mobilized its user base through grassroots organizing, with the Stand with Crypto campaign generating approximately 250,000 messages to Senate offices within just days. This demonstrated that coordinated advocacy could influence the legislative process, though the crypto industry's internal divisions complicated the narrative. The bill's rushed timeline—with only 48 hours provided for markup review—drew criticism for insufficient time to analyze complex provisions. Elements like presumptive government surveillance of peer-to-peer transactions and restrictions on DeFi raised concerns about overreach, though proponents argued these measures were necessary for anti-money laundering compliance. Senator Lummis, a crypto advocate, expressed frustration with the delay while maintaining that the legislative process remains on track.
The path forward has evolved since the initial disruption. The Senate Banking Committee's draft must be reconciled with the Senate Agricultural Committee's version, which was postponed to allow more time for review. Both versions then need alignment with the House's Digital Asset Market Clarity Act before reaching President Trump's desk. While prediction markets initially dropped to around 45% probability of passage, more recent developments suggest momentum may be building—Armstrong himself indicated in mid-January that the bill could potentially pass within a month. The fundamental tension remains: how to create regulatory clarity that protects consumers and prevents illicit activity while fostering innovation and avoiding the competitive distortions that favor incumbent financial institutions. Whether Coinbase's opposition ultimately improved the legislation or delayed needed regulatory certainty remains a matter of intense debate within the crypto community.
Tangem ➜ https://bit.ly/TangemPBN| Use Code: "PBN" for Additional Discounts!
