The latest Senate version of the CLARITY Act has triggered an intense battle between the U.S. banking industry and digital asset firms over one central question: should stablecoins function like money… or savings accounts?

The draft Bill formally bans interest paid “solely in connection with holding” payment stablecoins where rewards are “economically or functionally equivalent” to bank deposit interest. Critics argue the language leaves major room for stablecoin issuers to structure rewards through transactions, loyalty systems, liquidity provision, collateral activity, gaming ecosystems, creator economies, or broader platform participation.

That loophole is exactly what banking groups are now trying to close before the Senate markup on May 14.

Banks worry crypto firms could siphon deposits by offering interest-like rewards; crypto firms say a sweeping ban would be anti-competitive. The Senate is desperately trying to meet both parties half way: no interest simply for holding payment stablecoins, but perhaps room for genuine transaction-based rewards.

The legitimate concern of the bankers is the possibility that consumers and SMEs may begin treating stablecoins as parallel savings account outside the traditional banking system.

Suffice to say, the implications go beyond finance.

The CLARITY Act could disrupt the future of game economies, creator royalties, digital commerce, and programmable payments across online platforms.

Thursday May 14 2026 may become one of the most important crypto economy regulation dates in recent history.

👉 Subscribe to our newsletter to follow the latest developments in technology law: https://technologylaw.ai/subscribe

The CLARITY Act: the battle over stablecoin yield