Trump's Cryptocurrency Advisor: Market Structure Bill Must Compromise, Vote on January 27

Trump Advisor Patrick Wyatt Calls for Swift Passage of the Market Structure Bill, Warns “No Bill Is Better Than a Bad Bill” Era Is Over. Coinbase Withdraws Support, Leading to Senate Delay; Wyatt Warns of Missed Opportunity as Democrats Prepare Punitive Legislation. The hearing on January 27 requires 60 votes, and compromise is necessary.

Trump Cryptocurrency Advisor Warns: Not Acting Now Will Make Things Worse in the Future

Patrick Wyatt, Executive Director of the President’s Digital Asset Advisory Committee, states that the U.S. needs to pass the Cryptocurrency Market Structure Bill as soon as possible to avoid losing momentum under the current pro-cryptocurrency government leadership. “‘No bill is better than a bad bill’—thanks to President Trump’s victory and his pro-cryptocurrency administration, we can say this, and it’s a great honor.” Wyatt wrote on X Tuesday, referring to Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong’s comments last week when the exchange decided to withdraw support for the bill.

The White House crypto advisor said, “The Cryptocurrency Market Structure Bill will definitely be enacted—it’s just a matter of when, not if. So, should we seize the opportunity and pass this bill now… or miss the chance, allowing Democrats to craft punitive legislation after a future financial crisis, like the Dodd-Frank Act?”

This “time window” argument is very common in Washington politics. The pro-cryptocurrency stance of the Trump administration may only be temporary; if Democrats win the 2026 midterms or the 2028 presidential election, the regulatory environment could turn sharply. The Dodd-Frank Act Wyatt mentioned was a financial regulation law passed after the 2008 financial crisis, seen by many in the industry as overly punitive legislation. His implication is that if a relatively moderate Market Structure Bill isn’t passed during Trump’s term, future regulation could become even harsher.

“You may not like every part of the CLARITY Act, but I can guarantee you’ll dislike the version proposed by Democrats even more,” Wyatt posted on social media. “Let’s keep working to improve the bill, recognizing that compromises are necessary to secure 60 votes in the Senate, but we can’t let perfectionism hinder progress.” This “least of two evils” reasoning is the core logic Wyatt is using to persuade the crypto industry to accept compromise.

Coinbase Withdrawal Triggers Legislative Stalemate

As Wyatt made his latest comments, the crypto legislation process is at a standstill, mainly due to disagreements over specific bill details. Coinbase is one of Trump’s largest crypto donors and has raised objections to provisions that could restrict tokenized stocks, DeFi privacy, and stablecoin yields. The largest U.S. crypto exchange withdrew support for the current version of the bill, causing the Senate Banking Committee to postpone hearings, despite earlier expectations that the bill would be quickly sent to Trump for signing.

Coinbase’s concerns focus on three key areas. First is regulatory ambiguity around tokenized stocks; the draft bill might classify tokenized stocks as securities, which would limit innovation and increase compliance costs. Second is the DeFi privacy clause, which requires decentralized financial protocols to collect user identity information—contradicting DeFi’s core principle of anonymity. Third is the restriction on stablecoin yields; the draft could prohibit stablecoin issuers from paying interest to holders, weakening crypto firms’ competitiveness in the stablecoin market.

Although Coinbase initially withdrew support, it remains committed to improving the bill. Armstrong said in a video speech on Monday that he will discuss the bill with banking leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos, aiming to find consensus on stablecoin yield issues, as U.S. banks strongly oppose allowing crypto firms to offer such products. This conflict of interests between banks and crypto companies is a core obstacle to advancing the Market Structure Bill.

Senate 60-Vote Threshold Forces Compromise

Despite ongoing debates, lawmakers and industry stakeholders agree that the bill is crucial for providing regulatory certainty and resolving jurisdictional friction between the CFTC and SEC. The Senate Agriculture Committee will hold a hearing on January 27, which is a key moment for advancing the Market Structure Bill. The Senate Banking Committee has yet to set a new date for its postponed hearing, adding uncertainty to the bill’s progress. The Banking Committee oversees SEC regulation, and its delay may reflect strong opposition from Democratic members to certain provisions of the bill. If the two committees cannot coordinate, the bill could face further delays or even die in committee.

For the crypto industry, the January 27 hearing is not only procedural but also a test of Trump’s administration’s commitment to crypto legislation. If the hearing proceeds smoothly and parties show willingness to compromise, the bill could pass within weeks. Conversely, if the hearing becomes contentious, legislative progress may stall again. The 60-vote requirement in the Senate means bipartisan support is essential for passage, given that the current Senate is controlled by Republicans but does not have the 60 seats needed to overcome filibuster. Therefore, Trump’s team must seek support from some Democratic senators, necessitating negotiations and concessions. Wyatt emphasizes that “compromise is necessary,” reflecting this political reality.

Three Major Controversies in the Market Structure Bill

Tokenized Stocks Regulation: Coinbase opposes including them as securities; banks favor strict oversight

DeFi Privacy Requirements: Crypto industry opposes identity collection; regulators emphasize anti-money laundering

Stablecoin Yield Restrictions: Crypto firms want to pay interest; banks worry about unfair competition

CFTC vs SEC Jurisdiction: Clear delineation needed between commodity and security tokens

Behind these disputes are fundamental conflicts of interest between traditional finance and crypto innovation. Banks fear losing customers and business to crypto firms, lobbying for restrictions on stablecoin yields and tokenized stocks. Crypto companies argue these restrictions stifle innovation. Whether the Market Structure Bill can succeed depends on finding a balance between these interests.

January 27 Hearing as a Critical Turning Point

The Senate Agriculture Committee’s hearing on January 27 will be a pivotal moment for the progress of the Market Structure Bill. The committee oversees CFTC regulation, and one of the bill’s core provisions is expanding the CFTC’s jurisdiction over digital assets. The hearing will provide an opportunity for stakeholders to voice opinions and potentially lead to amendments of certain provisions.

The Senate Banking Committee has yet to set a new date for its postponed hearing, adding further uncertainty. This committee oversees SEC regulation, and its delay may reflect strong opposition from Democratic members to certain parts of the bill. If the two committees cannot reconcile their positions, the bill could face prolonged delays or even deadlock.

For the crypto industry, the January 27 hearing is not just procedural; it’s a litmus test for Trump’s government’s resolve to push crypto legislation. If the hearing proceeds smoothly and parties show willingness to compromise, the bill could pass within weeks. Conversely, if the hearing becomes contentious, legislative progress may stall again.