U.S. crypto exchanges are lobbying hard to erase a short but consequential phrase from the Senate’s Digital Asset Market Structure Bill — a move that could decide whether small-cap tokens can be listed on regulated U.S. venues.
What’s at issue
- The bill would bring spot “digital commodities” (tokens treated like Bitcoin and Ether, not securities) under CFTC supervision via a new class of registered digital commodity exchanges.
- A contested clause would permit exchanges to list only digital commodities “not readily susceptible to manipulation.” That language mirrors a longstanding CFTC test used for futures, where contracts can be blocked or delisted if the underlying asset is judged too easy to manipulate.
Exchanges push back
- Coinbase, Kraken and Gemini submitted redlined edits to staff of the Senate Agriculture Committee — which oversees the CFTC — asking the clause to be deleted, according to Politico and reporting summarized by CrowdfundInsider.
- The exchanges warn that applying a futures-style manipulability test to spot tokens would “effectively shut small, low-liquidity tokens out of regulated venues and hand future CFTC chairs a blunt tool to choke innovation.”
- Coinbase Federal Policy Director Robin Cook framed the problem as a “chicken-and-egg” one: tokens need exchange listings to build liquidity and reduce manipulatability, but the clause would bar those listings in the first place.
- The firms argue for a more practical approach based on strong market-surveillance obligations, transparency, and ongoing risk monitoring rather than an ex ante binary ban on theoretically “manipulable” assets.
Industry concerns and the whitelist risk
- Exchanges say the clause could create a de facto whitelist where only a handful of large-cap tokens (Bitcoin, Ether) pass muster, pushing thousands of smaller projects onto unregulated offshore platforms or decentralized exchanges.
- “Millions of Americans are participating in digital asset markets without the federal regulatory protections they deserve,” the firms wrote in a joint message, saying they want to expand oversight — not restrict market access.
Support for the clause
- Some market-abuse experts and consumer advocates back the manipulability test as a hard brake on risky, thinly traded tokens that have been targets of wash trading and pump-and-dump schemes. Those enforcement concerns have been highlighted in prior reporting.
Legislative dynamics and stakes
- The disputed wording appears in a sweeping market-structure package that splits jurisdiction: the Agriculture Committee (CFTC) handles half of the bill, and the Senate Banking Committee handles security-token and stablecoin provisions.
- Under a negotiators’ section-by-section draft, exchanges would be allowed to list only assets “not susceptible to manipulation” and only after diligence on market structure and networks — making the listing standard a key inter-committee flashpoint.
- Industry-wide pressure is building for clearer U.S. rules: more than 120 firms recently signed a letter urging the Senate Banking Committee to advance the CLARITY Act, reflecting broader demand for market-structure clarity.
Why it matters
- If the manipulation language survives, backers say it could curb fraudulent activity; opponents say it will drive innovation and liquidity offshore, depriving U.S. investors of regulated venues and protections.
- With congressional time limited, the outcome of a few lines of statutory text could determine whether small-cap tokens have a viable path onto regulated U.S. exchanges — and how “manipulation” will be defined in future U.S. crypto law.
Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
