CLARITY Act Advancement Battle: a16z Calls for Acceleration, Coinbase Opposes

The rules dispute in the crypto industry heats up. a16z crypto managing partner Chris Dixon recently called for accelerating the passage of the CLARITY Act, emphasizing that crypto developers urgently need clear regulatory rules. Meanwhile, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong announced the withdrawal of support for the bill, citing multiple clauses within it. This divergence reflects a fundamental difference in industry understanding of how to regulate.

Core of the Bill and Diverging Positions

Dixon’s reasoning for pushing forward

According to the latest news, Chris Dixon stated that over the past five years, the bipartisan efforts in the US, along with the Trump administration, have closely collaborated with the crypto industry with the shared goal of protecting decentralization, supporting developers, and providing fair opportunities for entrepreneurs. In his view, the CLARITY Act (Digital Asset Market Structure Bill) is a legislative attempt to achieve these goals.

Dixon admits that the bill is not perfect but emphasizes that now is the best time to push it forward— the Senate Banking Committee’s review window is opening, and missing this window could mean waiting several more years. His core argument is: if the US wants to remain the best place in the world to build the crypto future, it must accelerate progress.

Armstrong’s opposition focus

At the same time, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong’s stance is completely opposite. He listed three main reasons for opposition:

• The bill includes a “de facto tokenized stock ban”
• Contains privacy-infringing DeFi restrictions
• Weakens the authority of the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission)

Armstrong calls it a “bad bill” and publicly announced the withdrawal of support. This is not just a policy disagreement but a direct rejection of specific clauses within the bill.

The True Difference Behind the Dispute

This debate essentially reflects two different development paths within the industry:

a16z’s position: Prioritize regulatory clarity, even if the bill has flaws, the basic framework must be established first. This institution is highly enthusiastic about infrastructure investment—evidenced by their $140 million funding for Walrus, indicating their ongoing layout in the crypto ecosystem’s underlying layers. Clear rules benefit such infrastructure projects because they reduce long-term policy risks.

Coinbase’s position: Focus on core concerns about specific clauses, especially restrictions related to DeFi and privacy. As an exchange, Coinbase needs to protect user privacy and its DeFi ecosystem; certain clauses in the bill could directly threaten its business model.

Both organizations support the development of the crypto industry, but they have fundamental disagreements over “what kind of rules” should be implemented.

Market’s Actual Response

Interestingly, despite the controversy over the bill, capital market investments in crypto infrastructure have not slowed down. After Walrus went live, it completed a $140 million funding round led by Standard Crypto, with participation from a16z crypto and Electric Capital. This indicates that major institutions believe that regardless of the final shape of the CLARITY bill, crypto infrastructure remains a long-term track.

Meanwhile, the Sui ecosystem achieved a new breakthrough— the 2x SUI leveraged ETF (TXXS) launched by 21Shares was approved by the SEC and listed on Nasdaq. This is the first leveraged ETF linked to the Sui ecosystem, signaling that traditional institutional funds are entering the market. This phenomenon shows that even if regulatory rules are not fully clear, the market already recognizes the long-term value of the crypto ecosystem.

Key Points to Watch Moving Forward

The progress of the CLARITY bill will be a key focus in the coming months. Dixon emphasized that “now is the best time,” implying that this window may not be open for long. For the bill to pass the initial review in the Senate Banking Committee, modifications and negotiations will be necessary based on existing disagreements.

According to the latest news, the bill still requires amendments before becoming law. This means future negotiations will likely focus on specific clauses such as: the definition of tokenized assets, regulatory boundaries for DeFi activities, and balancing privacy protections.

Summary

The battle to advance the CLARITY bill is essentially a reflection of the growing pains of the crypto industry. The industry no longer needs a blank regulatory environment but clear and reasonable rules. The disagreement between a16z and Coinbase is not a rejection of the industry’s development direction but a difference in understanding of the specific regulatory framework.

The core points are: 1) Regulatory clarity has become a consensus in the industry, with disagreements only on how to clarify; 2) Major institutions continue to invest in infrastructure, indicating long-term confidence remains; 3) The final shape of the bill depends on the coordination process over the next few months. For developers, regardless of how the bill is amended, it’s better than continuing to operate in ambiguity—this is likely the fundamental reason why Dixon and Armstrong, despite their different stances, are both participating in this discussion.