The war, which began on Feb. 28, already cost taxpayers around $29 billion as of May for expended munitions, equipment repairs, and other operations, although outside estimates put the broader war cost closer to $50 billion. Last month, the Trump Administration asked the Senate for $87 billion in emergency funding, including $67 billion for the Pentagon. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told Senators the funding was needed to “rapidly replenish equipment and munitions,” and included $18 billion to replace advanced Patriot interceptors, Navy Tomahawks, and Army terminal high altitude area defense (THAAD) missiles.

The US Senate’s delay of a vote on crypto market structure legislation could give Hong Kong and Singapore more time to strengthen their positions as digital asset hubs, according to First Digital founder and CEO Vincent Chok.

On Friday, Thune’s office confirmed to Cointelegraph that the Senate would not vote on the legislation before the August recess. Thune cited Democratic opposition and said the bill would be a priority when senators return in September.

Chok, whose company issues the FDUSD stablecoin, said the delay could give jurisdictions with clearer regulatory frameworks an advantage in attracting capital and talent as US uncertainty weighs on institutional adoption. 

He said the postponement leaves institutions without clear rules on market structure, custody and oversight. “Markets can adapt to slower timelines, but what they struggle with is prolonged uncertainty,” he said in a statement sent to Cointelegraph.

Delay fuels concerns over enforcement and offshore innovation

Chok said regulatory progress outside the US would continue regardless of the CLARITY Act’s timetable.

“For Asia, this delay gives regional financial hubs like Hong Kong and Singapore additional time to demonstrate that clear regulation can coexist with innovation,” he said. 

Maylea Ma, deputy general counsel at decentralized exchange aggregator 1inch, said that if Congress ultimately failed to enact the legislation, the industry could face a return to “regulation by enforcement.” Market participants would remain dependent on agency interpretations, case-by-case enforcement and a fragmented patchwork of state money transmitter and securities rules, she said.

Related: CLARITY Act failure could send crypto valuations lower: Bernstein

Ma contrasted that uncertainty with the European Union, where the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) is already in force. She said 1inch would continue operating under its conservative, non-custodial and self-custody-focused model while awaiting greater legal certainty in the US.

Wellington-Altus chief market strategist James E. Thorne offered a more politically charged response, calling the postponement a “fold” by Thune and a victory for Senator Elizabeth Warren and the regulatory status quo. He said continued ambiguity would push innovation offshore while other jurisdictions develop clearer regimes.

“Regulation should have been passed years ago,” he wrote on X. “Instead, Washington chose to live in ambiguity, letting Warren and the bank lobby weaponise uncertainty, the SEC and the Fed went along for the ride, and now Thune is keeping the CLARITY Act stuck in procedural limbo.”

Magazine: 10 weirdest things ever tokenized… including farts

On 3 August, US Senate Majority Leader John Thune announced plans to hold an initial vote on the CLARITY Act before the August recess. However, as of 5 August, no exact date for the vote had been announced, and the future progress of the bill remained uncertain. Potential approval of the legislation could reduce regulatory uncertainty surrounding digital assets and influence XRP, although it would not automatically guarantee a change in its regulatory status.

Technical Analysis of Ripple

On the four-hour XRP/USD chart, the decline from July’s local highs gradually slowed, leading to a narrowing trading range that resembles a contracting triangle pattern. On 6 August, the price attempted to break below the formation, and the downside potential remains intact. If the decline continues, the next key area of interest is around $1.0200, where the market could find a reaction.

If the breakout proves to be false, the price will face several important levels on the upside: the lower boundary of the current profile at $1.0590, the POC zone at $1.0690, and the upper boundary at $1.0830. A move above the profile would also bring the red resistance level at $1.0900 into focus. The RSI and MAs indicators show readings of 33, 39 and 43. The RSI line and the faster moving average have already moved below the neutral zone, while the slower MA is only beginning to approach a potential exit from it.

Attention should also be paid to vertical volume: activity has increased noticeably in the middle of the triangle, which does not fully align with the typical pattern of volume contraction ahead of a breakout. This divergence raises questions about the technical quality of the formation and the reliability of the breakout signal.

Summary

The break below the lower boundary of the triangle occurred amid unusual volume activity within the pattern, adding further uncertainty to the current setup. XRP’s next move may depend not only on technical factors but also on the outlook for the CLARITY Act, which could influence sentiment across the broader cryptocurrency market.

FXOpen offers the world’s most popular cryptocurrency CFDs*, including Bitcoin and Ethereum. Floating spreads, 1:2 leverage — at your service (additional fees may apply). Open your trading account now or learn more about crypto CFD trading with FXOpen.

*Important: At FXOpen UK, Cryptocurrency trading via CFDs is only available to our Professional clients. They are not available for trading by Retail clients. To find out more information about how this may affect you, please get in touch with our team.

This article represents the opinion of the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand only. It is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation with respect to products and services provided by the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand, nor is it to be considered financial advice.

The Senate has postponed the CLARITY Act floor vote until lawmakers return from the August recess. Senate Majority Leader John Thune confirmed the delay and outlined plans for September. As a result, the decision extends negotiations over a federal digital asset regulatory framework.

Senate Leadership Shifts CLARITY Act Vote Beyond August Recess

Senate Majority Leader John Thune confirmed that the Senate will not vote on the CLARITY Act before the August recess. Instead, Republican leadership plans to prepare the legislation for floor consideration after lawmakers return in September. Therefore, the measure remains pending despite earlier expectations of quicker action.

The confirmation followed reports from Capitol Hill indicating that Senate leaders had changed their legislative timetable. The revised schedule places the digital asset market structure bill on the agenda after the recess concludes. Meanwhile, lawmakers will use the break to continue discussions surrounding the proposal.

The delay means the Senate will resume work on the legislation during its September session. Republican leaders had explored options for advancing the bill before leaving Washington. However, the chamber did not complete the required procedural steps before the scheduled recess.

Democratic Concerns Extend Negotiations Over Market Structure Bill

Democratic senators continued seeking additional negotiations before supporting the legislation for a final vote. They maintained concerns over unresolved provisions affecting the broader digital asset regulatory framework. As a result, bipartisan agreement remained incomplete before the Senate adjourned.

Republican leadership had explored procedural paths that could accelerate consideration of several pending measures. Those efforts included discussions surrounding unanimous consent agreements before the recess. Nevertheless, senators did not reach the broad agreement required to move the legislation forward immediately.

The Senate also considered the procedural requirements necessary before floor debate could begin. A cloture process remains one available path for advancing the measure toward debate and voting. Even so, leadership chose to postpone that effort until lawmakers return after the August break.

CLARITY Act Background Keeps Digital Asset Framework in Focus

The CLARITY Act seeks to establish a comprehensive regulatory structure for digital assets across the United States. The proposal aims to define oversight responsibilities and improve regulatory certainty for the industry. Accordingly, lawmakers continue treating the legislation as a significant policy initiative.

The House previously approved the CLARITY Act before sending the legislation to the Senate. That action placed responsibility on senators to review, debate, and determine the bill’s future. Therefore, the Senate now holds the next major step in the legislative process.

Supporters argue that the proposal would provide clearer rules for digital asset markets and related businesses. Meanwhile, lawmakers continue examining governance, compliance, and oversight provisions within the legislation. Those discussions remain active despite the delayed voting schedule.

The postponement does not remove the bill from the Senate agenda after the recess. Instead, leadership intends to prepare the legislation for consideration when lawmakers reconvene in September. Consequently, negotiations are expected to continue during the intervening weeks.

Committee work and private discussions may also shape the bill before its return to the Senate floor. Senators from both parties still have opportunities to address remaining policy differences. Therefore, revisions could emerge before leadership schedules the measure for debate.

The Senate’s decision reflects the chamber’s broader legislative calendar rather than a final judgment on the proposal. Lawmakers still retain multiple procedural options for advancing the measure after the recess. For now, the CLARITY Act remains under Senate consideration as discussions continue toward a possible September floor vote.

Cracking down on ‘birth tourism’ 

The U.S. Senate will not vote on the CLARITY Act before the August recess, a delay that could prolong regulatory uncertainty for crypto firms and indirectly strengthen the bargaining position of jurisdictions already offering clearer rules. First Digital CEO and FDUSD stablecoin issuer Vincent Chok said the postponement gives places like Hong Kong and Singapore more time to demonstrate that regulation and innovation can coexist.

According to an office confirmation relayed to Cointelegraph, Senator John Thune’s team said the bill will be prioritized when senators return in September. The delay is attributed to Democratic opposition to the legislation.

Key takeaways

• The U.S. Senate will not hold a pre-August recess vote on the CLARITY Act; lawmakers are expected to revisit the bill in September.
• Industry leaders warn that prolonged uncertainty can slow institutional adoption more than long timelines can.
• Executives argue that clearer Asian regulatory frameworks could attract more talent and capital as U.S. rules remain unsettled.
• Critics say the outcome risks a return to “regulation by enforcement” if Congress fails to set out coherent market structure rules.
• Some market participants contrast the U.S. delay with the EU’s MiCA regime, which is already in effect.

What the Senate delay means for U.S. market structure

Chok’s comments highlight the core problem many market participants associate with the CLARITY Act debate: without an enacted framework, institutions must operate amid unclear expectations around market structure, custody, and oversight.

In a statement sent to Cointelegraph, Chok said markets can adjust to slower timelines, but “what they struggle with is prolonged uncertainty.” For institutions—especially those weighing regulated custody arrangements, compliance resourcing, and operational risk—this type of ambiguity can translate into delayed decisions, reduced willingness to offer new products, or a preference for platforms and venues that feel less exposed to changing enforcement priorities.

The CLARITY Act is often viewed as a potential bridge toward predictable rules for how digital asset markets should be structured in the U.S. With a Senate vote now pushed beyond the August recess, the question shifts from “whether the bill advances” to “how long uncertainty lasts—and whether it becomes a permanent drag on institutional momentum.”

Pressure on institutions: enforcement risk and compliance fragmentation

Maylea Ma, deputy general counsel at decentralized exchange aggregator 1inch, framed the stakes in terms of enforcement style rather than just timeline. If Congress does not ultimately enact the CLARITY Act, Ma said the industry could face a renewed emphasis on “regulation by enforcement.”

She described continued reliance on agency interpretations, case-by-case enforcement, and a patchwork of state-level rules covering money transmission and securities-related obligations. In practice, that kind of fragmentation can raise compliance costs and make it harder to scale across jurisdictions—particularly for firms trying to build products that require consistent regulatory expectations.

At the same time, Ma said 1inch expects to keep operating with a model that is conservative on custody—stressing non-custodial and self-custody characteristics—while waiting for greater legal certainty in the U.S.

That distinction matters: some business models can be adapted to enforcement risk by limiting custodial responsibility, while others—such as offerings that require regulated custody partners or broad consumer access—may still struggle under an unclear baseline for oversight.

Why Asia could benefit as clarity becomes a competitive advantage

Chok argued that regulatory progress outside the U.S. would continue regardless of the CLARITY Act’s timetable. In his view, the delay provides regional hubs additional time to show that clear rules can be paired with ongoing innovation.

His comments effectively position regulatory certainty as a market asset. When institutions consider where to allocate resources—launching new services, hiring compliance talent, or setting up operational infrastructure—jurisdictions with settled frameworks can appear less risky than those where policy is repeatedly deferred.

That competitive dynamic is also reflected in the political critique offered by Wellington-Altus chief market strategist James E. Thorne. Posting on X, Thorne characterized the postponement as a defeat for the bill’s momentum and suggested it could encourage innovation to move offshore while other regions develop more defined regimes.

While Thorne’s language is partisan, the underlying theme aligns with the broader industry concern: uncertainty creates incentives to seek regulatory certainty elsewhere, especially for firms with global plans.

Europe’s MiCA as a benchmark—and the U.S. gap

Ma pointed to the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) as an example of a framework already in force. She said 1inch would continue with its current operational approach while the U.S. awaits clearer guidance.

MiCA’s status matters in this context because it provides a reference point for companies and institutions comparing where compliance effort may be more predictable. When one region is already operating under a harmonized set of requirements, the contrast with the U.S.—where digital asset regulatory treatment can still vary by agency focus and jurisdiction—can influence product roadmaps.

In other words, the Senate delay is not happening in a vacuum. Even if the CLARITY Act were to move forward later, market participants are already using other regulatory baselines to plan risk and timelines.

With the Senate vote now expected in September, the next watchpoint is whether the bill gains sufficient support to move beyond procedural friction. Until then, institutions are likely to keep balancing their U.S. strategies against the operational certainty offered by other regimes—especially as the industry asks whether “later” clarity can avoid turning into an extended period of enforcement-led governance.