Chairman Tim Scott (RS.C.) listens to the testimony of Mr. Kevin Warsh on Tuesday, April 21, 2026 at the Dirksen Building.
Tom Williams | CQ-Roll Call Inc. | Getty Images
The crypto industry’s major road rules bill is scheduled for its first vote in the Senate Banking Committee on May 14th.
Moving this bill forward would be a loss to the banking industry. Banks argue that the proposed language in the bill that would limit when stablecoins can earn interest remains too similar to yield-bearing products like savings accounts and could threaten traditional banks and their deposits. Historically, interest in the form of rewards has been an important motivator for users to hold stablecoins.
Scott told Fox Business last week that he wanted to add “13 out of 13 Republicans,” referring to all Republicans on the committee.
It’s unclear whether Democrats will vote in favor of the bill, given unresolved disagreements such as an excess clause that limits how politicians can profit from digital assets.
Several senators and industry experts have suggested that the bill could be changed to gain Democratic support between a committee vote and a potential vote on the Senate floor. But time is running out for lawmakers to resolve their differences, and it’s unclear whether the House wants to make its own changes.
The committee was scheduled to advance the bill in January, but halted at the 11th hour after both the banking and crypto industries expressed concerns about the bill.
Crypto companies including coinbase Now, Sens. Thom Tillis (RN.C.) and Angela Allsbrooks (D-Md.) are joining in after they announced a compromise on how crypto companies can offer stablecoin users rewards that don’t compete with the yields banks offer on deposits. Stabecoin is a digital currency designed to maintain consistent value by being pegged to a reserve currency (usually the US dollar).
But groups representing both commercial and community banks say this language is “insufficient” to protect bank deposits.
In a post on X, Tillis acknowledged that while banks may not be happy with the language, they “respectfully agree to disagree.”
