Senators Tillis and Gallego finalize revisions to Clarity Act’s conflict-of-interest section

Two senators from opposite sides of the aisle just finished rewriting one of the most politically sensitive sections of the biggest crypto bill in Congress. Now they need their colleagues to actually read it before everyone leaves town.

Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) finalized their bipartisan revision to the conflict-of-interest provisions in the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act on July 29, tightening restrictions on senior federal officials’ involvement with digital assets. The problem: most legislators haven’t reviewed the new language, and the Senate’s August recess is bearing down like a deadline nobody studied for.

What changed and why it matters

The Tillis-Gallego revision is essentially a counteroffer to a White House-backed ethics proposal released on July 22. That earlier version drew sharp criticism from Democrats who called it inadequate, particularly over a 2029 sunset clause that would have let the restrictions expire.

The revised language, while not yet publicly available, is designed to impose stricter limits on how federal officials can interact with digital asset issuance.

The underlying bill itself has broad goals: splitting regulatory authority between the SEC and CFTC, creating clearer frameworks for spot markets in digital commodities, and addressing thorny issues like stablecoin yields and illicit finance. But none of that moves forward if Congress can’t agree on the conflict-of-interest guardrails.

Gallego, a first-term Democrat from Arizona, was among the Democrats who voted to advance an earlier version of the CLARITY Act out of the Senate Banking Committee back on May 14, when it passed with a 15-9 vote.

The legislative clock problem

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has indicated that a procedural vote could happen in the window between July 29 and August 1. But he’s also publicly expressed skepticism about whether the full bill can be completed before the August recess.

The House passed its version, H.R. 3633, back in July 2025 with a 294-134 vote. But the Senate has spent the better part of a year introducing revisions, negotiating side deals, and cycling through competing ethics proposals.

What this means for crypto investors

The CLARITY Act represents the most serious attempt yet to draw clear jurisdictional lines between the SEC and CFTC when it comes to digital assets.

The stablecoin yield provisions tucked into the broader bill also deserve attention. How Congress ultimately treats yield-bearing stablecoins will have direct implications for DeFi protocols, centralized exchanges offering stablecoin products, and the competitive positioning of US-based stablecoin issuers against offshore alternatives.

The bipartisan work from Tillis and Gallego is genuinely significant. Getting a Republican and a Democrat to agree on ethics language for crypto legislation is harder than it sounds, especially in an election year. The question now is whether the rest of the Senate treats this as a finished product worth voting on, or a homework assignment they’ll get to after summer break.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.