The stalled crypto market structure legislation in the United States is edging toward a mark-up, with Senator Thom Tillis signaling that he will push the Senate Banking Committee to schedule a formal session on the bill when lawmakers return to Washington. Tillis, a leading Republican on the panel, told reporters that the committee should move forward with a markup to prevent further protraction, arguing that the text has progressed sufficiently to merit a formal vote.

The legislation would define how the U.S.’ two flagship market regulators — the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission — oversee crypto markets. The House has already passed its version, the CLARITY Act, but the Senate version has faced delays as negotiators and stakeholders sought to refine provisions. The path forward gained complexity after the committee postponed a markup in January when Coinbase pulled its support over a stipulation banning crypto exchanges from paying yields on stablecoins.

Thom Tillis speaking with reporters this week on the legislative process.

The discussions unfold amid a broader policy dialogue on how to regulate digital assets in a manner consistent with traditional financial markets while addressing innovation, consumer protection, and anti‑money‑laundering objectives. The Senate bill’s fate hinges on several contentious provisions, including the treatment of stablecoins, the rights of software developers, and the ethics framework governing government officials’ engagement with crypto policies. Tillis has suggested that the committee should advance the bill unless meaningful changes are obstructing the process, while indicating willingness to incorporate additional good-faith concessions from stakeholders.

According to Cointelegraph, Tillis indicated that he intends to publicly release the legislative text at least four days before the markup to give crypto and banking participants a preview and meaningful time to prepare comments and compliance adjustments. He stressed that early visibility would help inform a constructive, transparent negotiation process as lawmakers weigh the balance between oversight, innovation, and enforcement.

Beyond the procedural questions, the bill contains a suite of provisions that have drawn intense lobbying from both sides of the aisle and from industry groups. One central flashpoint is a clause related to stablecoins and yield payments. Some industry participants argue that prohibiting third parties from paying yield on stablecoins closes a perceived loophole in the GENIUS Act, which already restricts stablecoin issuers from paying yield. Bank lobbyists have pressed to retain portions of this provision, framing it as a necessary safeguard against yield-based incentives that could complicate consumer protections and market integrity.

Key takeaways

• The Senate Banking Committee plans to schedule a markup on the stalled crypto market structure bill upon lawmakers’ return, signaling renewed momentum toward finalizing legislation that would clarify regulator oversight for crypto markets.
• The House-passed CLARITY Act contrasts with the Senate version; the latter remains under negotiation, with progress attributed to recent deliberations but lingering points of contention.
• A January markup delay followed Coinbase’s withdrawal of support over a stablecoin yield provision, highlighting how issuer-liability and yield practices influence legislative support and stakeholder engagement.
• Ethics language and protections for software developers are high-priority items; lawmakers have pressed to ensure that provisions governing officials’ use and promotion of crypto are robust before passage.
• Law enforcement considerations are under scrutiny, with reports that a provision protecting developers from prosecution for illicit activity on platforms requires further refinement, a point of debate among legislators and industry participants.

Legislative trajectory and timing

The core aim of the Senate bill is to delineate how the United States will regulate crypto markets by assigning authority and responsibilities to the country’s main financial-market regulators. While the House version, the CLARITY Act, has cleared the chamber, the Senate counterpart has struggled with a series of edits that reflect ongoing negotiations between lawmakers and industry stakeholders. The January postponement of the markup, prompted by Coinbase’s decision to withdraw its backing, underscored the sensitivity of some provisions to corporate risk assessments and compliance considerations.

Senator Tillis indicated that progress has been made and that the committee will consider moving forward with a markup when the Senate reconvenes in May. He signaled a preference for advancing the bill rather than allowing it to languish as a function of ongoing negotiation on a few disputed points. He also emphasized the importance of timely disclosure of the legislative text to enable stakeholders to review. The goal, as described by Tillis, is to ensure the process remains productive and capable of delivering a final, enforceable framework that can withstand regulatory scrutiny.

In parallel, the policy conversation includes ethics provisions related to how government officials engage with crypto policy and the need for heightened governance standards to prevent conflicts of interest or improper use of regulatory influence. Tillis aligned with a broader Democratic call for ethics language, arguing that the bill must include robust restrictions on official conduct before it can advance, else he would oppose it.

There is also attention on how the bill addresses law enforcement concerns around potential protections for developers. Reports have indicated that this area remains unsettled, with lawmakers seeking a balance between encouraging innovation in software development and preserving accountability for illicit activity conducted on crypto platforms. Senator Cynthia Lummis has been cited as making progress on this provision, but the ultimate language remains a subject of intense negotiation.

Looking ahead, Tillis’s stated plan to publish the text several days before markup aims to facilitate constructive scrutiny from crypto firms, exchanges, and financial institutions that would be subject to the final framework. The timing could be critical for compliance teams to align internal risk controls, AML/KYC processes, and licensing considerations with any policy shifts emerging from the markup process.

Politico reported that lawmakers will need to address law enforcement concerns surrounding the provision that would shield developers from prosecution for illegal activity carried out on their platforms. This reflects the broader tension between fostering technological innovation and ensuring accountable liability frameworks — a central question for regulators as they seek to reduce systemic risk while preserving the incentives for responsible innovation. Tillis has described himself as generally supportive of Lummis’s progress on this area, signaling a pragmatic approach to achieving consensus without compromising core governance objectives.

Contested provisions: stablecoins, ethics, and enforcement

At the heart of the contention is a tension between avoiding regulatory gaps that could permit opaque or risky activity and preserving a conducive environment for legitimate innovation in digital assets and related technologies. The GENIUS Act’s approach to stablecoin yields has become a focal point for both supporters and skeptics of the current drafting. Proponents of allowing yield connections argue that comprehensive clarity about payment models and custodial arrangements is essential for market integrity and consumer protection, while opponents contend that yield-bearing schemes present potential misalignment with traditional securities or banking laws. The resulting debate has direct implications for stablecoin issuers, exchanges, and financial partners engaged in cross-border settlements and liquidity provisioning.

On ethics, the bill’s proposed language would set boundaries around the use and promotion of crypto within official capacities, a topic that gained prominence as lawmakers sought to ensure that policy development remains insulated from improper influence. The insistence on explicit ethics provisions reflects a broader regulatory trend toward heightened governance standards in financial technology policy making, which could influence how agencies collaborate with private actors and how enforcement priorities are framed.

Enforcement considerations, particularly around protections for software developers, raise important questions about liability and accountability in a rapidly evolving ecosystem. While supporters argue for a form of safe harbor that accelerates innovation and clarifies developer responsibilities, critics warn that insufficient safeguards could impede enforcement against illicit activity or obscure gatekeeping signals in high-risk segments of the market. The evolving text seeks a balance that would satisfy consumer protection and anti‑fraud objectives without stifling legitimate development and deployment of crypto software.

Regulatory implications for institutions and markets

For exchanges, wallets, and other crypto market participants, a Senate-passed framework would provide much-needed regulatory clarity on jurisdiction and supervisory expectations. The prospect of formal oversight by both the SEC and CFTC could influence licensing regimes, registration requirements, and ongoing compliance burdens. Institutions that operate cross-border activities would also need to assess how the U.S. framework interacts with international standards and regional rules such as the European Union’s MiCA regime, highlighting the importance of harmonization in areas like disclosure, custody, and consumer protections.

From a compliance perspective, the anticipated text release four days before markup would be a critical milestone. Firms would use that window to assess the impact on AML/KYC workflows, reporting requirements, and governance procedures. The policy alignment with anti‑money‑laundering rules and financing of terrorism controls would influence how exchanges handle customer due diligence, suspicious activity monitoring, and cross-border transaction screening. In parallel, licensing and oversight expectations could affect banking relationships and access to payment rails, given ongoing regulatory scrutiny over crypto exposure in mainstream financial systems.

For policymakers, the bill signals a deliberate attempt to define a stable coordination between innovation incentives and market safeguards. The interlocking debates over stablecoin economics, developer protections, and ethics language illustrate how regulatory design choices can shape the pace of industry growth, the resilience of market infrastructure, and the ability of the United States to compete globally in crypto finance while maintaining robust risk controls. The degree to which the bill can reconcile these objectives will influence not only domestic market structure but also cross-border policy conversations and the trajectory of crypto-enabled financial services.

As the majority of these issues remain under negotiation, observers should monitor the committee’s calendar for a markup date, the timing of the public release of the legislative text, and the reactions from major industry groups and financial institutions. The outcome will likely set the tone for U.S. crypto regulation in the near term and could shape regulatory expectations for exchanges, stablecoin issuers, and developers operating within the ecosystem.

In sum, the Senate’s approach to the crypto market structure bill reflects a careful attempt to codify regulatory oversight while preserving the capacity for innovation. The coming weeks will reveal whether negotiators can bridge divergences on yield provisions, enforcement protections for developers, and ethics standards, paving the way for a vote that could redefine the regulatory landscape for digital assets in the United States.

Closing perspective: The next phase hinges on the markup schedule, the availability of a finalized text for review, and the capacity of lawmakers to reconcile core policy tensions. Stakeholders should stay attuned to committee proceedings and statements from key legislators, as the balance between enforcement, innovation, and consumer protection will continue to shape the trajectory of crypto regulation in the United States.

The governance proposal around World Liberty Financial (WLFI), a project linked to the Trump family, has moved into a formal community vote after triggering a visible crypto-market reaction. The measure would lock more than 62 billion WLFI tokens held by early investors and insiders for two years, followed by a staged release over a subsequent two to three years. The vote opened on Wednesday and is set to run through May 7, with early data showing overwhelming support but sparking a heated debate within the community about long-term tokenomics and governance control.

According to the proposal, 62,282,252,205 WLFI tokens would be subjected to a multi-year vesting schedule designed to keep a large portion of supply off the market for an extended period. The structure calls for a two-year cliff for early holders, after which a two-year linear vesting would release tokens gradually. For insiders such as founders, team members and advisers, the plan envisions a two-year cliff followed by a three-year linear vest. The intention, as described by World Liberty Financial, is to ensure token holders remain committed to the project’s long-term trajectory and to provide a more bounded picture of governance preferences.

As voting commenced, WLFI supporters appeared to outnumber critics by a wide margin. At the time of reporting, the tally showed about 6 billion votes in favor versus roughly 3.2 million against, with the voting quorum of 1 billion WLFI tokens already met. World Liberty Financial highlighted the governance move as a pivotal moment in the project’s history, asserting that none of the locked tokens would touch the market for at least two years if the proposal passes. The stance was echoed on the project’s official X (formerly Twitter) account.

Key takeaways

• Locking 62.28 billion WLFI tokens held by early investors and insiders under a two-year cliff, then releasing over two to three years.
• Insiders face a two-year cliff with a three-year linear vest; early investors face a two-year cliff with a two-year linear vest.
• The live vote shows overwhelming support (about 6 billion in favor vs. 3.2 million against) with the quorum already reached; voting continues through May 7.
• WLFI price activity reflects market skepticism around multi-year vesting, with the token trading around $0.06367 and showing a notable decline in recent days.

Governance mechanics and tokenomics at stake

The proposed schedule targets a gradualized unlock that shifts the token’s liquidity dynamic away from immediate market exposure. Proponents argue the structure helps align governance incentives with long-term project success, ensuring that those with a material stake remain vested in WLFI’s ongoing development. The two-year cliff for all participants, followed by staged releases, is meant to produce a predictable supply trajectory rather than the abrupt changes typical of abrupt unlock events.

Critics, however, have raised questions about both the underlying logic and practical effects. Observers have pointed to the length of the vesting windows and the potential for a prolonged liquidity constraint to distort price discovery or constrain market-making activity. The broader governance conversation also touches on whether the mechanism adequately captures the diverse interests of holders who may not participate in voting yet would be affected by the lockup.

The debate has been fueled by comments from notable crypto figures. Earlier coverage highlighted commentary from Moonrock Capital founder Simon Dedic, who described the proposal as akin to a rug pull and questioned the alignment of a two-year unlock with political timelines. Justin Sun, a WLFI stakeholder and founder of the Tron network, labeled the proposal among the most “absurd” he has seen. Those criticisms were echoed in the public replies to World Liberty Financial’s vote announcement, where many community members criticized the structure and its perceived centralization of control.

World Liberty Financial has defended the plan as a way to promote clear governance preferences and to keep token ownership among those genuinely committed to the project’s long-term success. In posts accompanying the vote launch, the team framed the mechanism as a deliberate attempt to reduce speculative activity and to anchor decision-making among core supporters rather than transient participants.

Market reception and investor considerations

Market reaction to the unfolding governance vote has been prominent. Data from CoinGecko at the time of writing places WLFI around $0.06367, reflecting a roughly 13.6% drop in the previous 24 hours and a broader decline of about 72.8% from its open-market level. The price action underscores the sensitivity of WLFI to news around tokenomics and governance, where a major change to supply and vesting can influence short-term sentiment as investors reassess risk and liquidity implications.

Those tracking WLFI’s trajectory will be watching how the market prices in the implications of a long-term token lock. If the proposal passes, the restricted supply could support a longer-duration price stabilization argument, though actual liquidity will depend on secondary-market dynamics, the pace of vesting, and how quickly counterbalancing investor activity returns to the market. If the proposal fails, WLFI could face renewed questions about governance efficacy and the distribution of control among early holders, insiders, and broader token holders.

Cointelegraph has reached out to World Liberty Financial for comment on the current vote and the broader governance framework. The initiative also reflects a wider conversation in the crypto space about how to balance founder and investor incentives with open, inclusive governance that can withstand scrutiny from a diverse set of stakeholders.

For readers seeking more context, related coverage has explored how other major industry players are navigating governance and token unlocks, and how these decisions impact investor confidence and platform adoption. The broader narrative around regulatory clarity, governance design, and long-horizon token economics continues to shape sentiment across communities tracking WLFI and similar projects.

As the vote unfolds, observers should monitor not only the final tally but also how the WLFI community discusses and interprets the proposed constraints on liquidity and the implications for future governance proposals. The outcome could influence how WLFI approaches future token economics and whether similar governance structures become a template for other projects seeking to anchor long-term commitment among core stakeholders.

Source: World Liberty Financial via its X post and the coverage from Cointelegraph. The live voting and related details are documented in the project’s governance portal and official communications noted in the cited coverage.

Readers are encouraged to verify developments as the May 7 voting deadline approaches and to consider how such governance models may shape investor risk, participation incentives, and the broader market’s appetite for long-term, locked-token strategies.

DOGE$0.1062 traders are taking risks, sending the token’s price sharply higher, even as the rally in market leader bitcoin BTC$75,735.40 stalls.

It’s evident in the futures market where open interest in DOGE futures has risen to 15.36 billion tokens, the highest level this year, according to Coinglass. Open interest (OI) refers to the number of active contracts at any given time.

The upswing in open interest suggests more traders are chasing leveraged directional plays, a sign of strong risk sentiment in the market.

DOGE’s price has climbed nearly 10% over the past week, briefly pushing above 11 cents before settling near $0.105 as of writing, according to data source CoinDesk. Bitcoin, meanwhile, has pulled back below $76,000 after trading above $79,000 earlier this week.

The combination of rising spot price and futures OI suggests that new money is entering the market rather than old positions being closed. The pattern is said to reinforce the prevailing market trend, which is bullish, in DOGE’s case. However, it also leaves the market more exposed to sharp liquidations if momentum reverses.

Binance accounted for nearly 3.99 billion DOGE in open interest, followed by Bitget, Bybit, and OKX, each with more than 1 billion DOGE, data shows. Hyperliquid, MEXC, WhiteBIT, and KuCoin also showed sizable positions, pointing to a move not confined to a single venue.

DOGE’s rally comes after weeks of sideways trading and a broader return of speculative interest across majors earlier in the week.

Market observers such as Jordan Jefferson, founder of DogeOS and MyDoge, said in a message to CoinDesk that several catalysts may be contributing to demand for the token.

“DOGE’s price move isn’t tied to a single news event,” Jefferson said. “Over the past week, large holders added more than 500 million DOGE. 21Shares listed a physically backed ETP on Xetra, and Grayscale flows turned positive after nine straight days of outflows. On-chain activity is also up, with active addresses rising 28%.”

Those flows matter because DOGE’s market structure tends to respond quickly when spot accumulation, derivatives leverage, and retail narratives align.

The token has historically traded less like a payments asset and more like an attention-driven macro meme, where positioning can accelerate fast once traders believe a familiar catalyst is back in play.

The X payments angle remains a swing factor, but the least concrete part of the DOGE trade. Elon Musk has said that X Money will launch as a payments product with peer-to-peer transfers, bank deposits, a debit card and cashback rewards through X Payments, a licensed subsidiary partnered with Visa.

Nothing in the announced product indicates support for dogecoin or any crypto functionality. Still, DOGE traders could be reacting to the payments-related developments at Musk-owned companies, possibly in hopes that the token could eventually be folded into X’s financial stack. This hope comes from Musk’s vocal support for dogecoin since at least 2021. At one point, he said the token could make DeFi more accessible to everyone.

For now, traders are treating DOGE as if something bigger is building, and the futures market is where that conviction is showing first.

• White House Budget 2026 proposes applying wash sale rules to crypto, closing a loophole unavailable to equity traders
• Treasury estimates the change generates $5.4 billion in revenue over 10 years
• A 30% Mining Tax on electricity costs targets proof-of-work operations directly
• FATCA reporting would extend to foreign crypto accounts over $50,000
• The proposal faces a difficult legislative path in a Congress that has been moving toward pro-crypto regulation

World Liberty Financial’s proposal to unlock 62 billion WLFI tokens is already set to pass, with early votes blowing past quorum and delivering near-unanimous support.

Under the plan, founders, team members, and partners would burn 10% of their holdings, roughly 4.5 billion WLFI, to begin unlocking the remaining 40.7 billion tokens over a five-year schedule following a two-year cliff.

No tokens would reach the market for at least two years due to cliff periods. The shift marks a structural change in how WLFI is valued, replacing open-ended lockups with predictable future supply and creating a clearer exit path for holders who previously had none.

This move seems to have near-unanimous support, with 99.5% voting in favor.

The vote also highlights the structure of WLFI’s governance.

Participation levels align with prior proposals, suggesting that a relatively small group of large holders can push through major tokenomic changes with limited opposition.

Voting power is heavily concentrated among a small group of large holders. The largest wallet alone accounts for nearly 13% of votes cast, and the top four together control roughly 40% of total voting power so far, enough to heavily influence the outcome on their own.

WLFI also faces a lawsuit from Tron founder Justin Sun, who alleges the project froze his tokens and stripped his governance rights, claims the company has denied.

Key Highlights

• Bitcoin decreased 2.1% to reach $75,633 while Brent crude oil surged 7.1% to $126.41 per barrel, marking a four-year peak
• Military briefings regarding potential U.S. operations against Iran sparked the energy price rally and triggered risk-averse trading
• Leading altcoins including Ether, XRP, Solana, and BNB recorded losses; Dogecoin bucked the trend with a 3.8% increase
• Nasdaq 100 futures reversed a 1.1% gain despite positive results from Alphabet and Amazon; Meta shares declined 6%
• Market experts suggest Bitcoin requires crude prices below $100 and reduced Middle East conflict before testing $80,000

Digital currencies experienced widespread declines on Thursday as petroleum prices climbed to levels not seen in four years, fueled by emerging reports of possible U.S. military engagement with Iran.

Brent crude oil experienced a sharp 7.1% increase to $126.41 per barrel following an Axios report indicating President Donald Trump would receive briefings on updated military strategies concerning Iran. Additionally, reports suggest U.S. Central Command has requested the deployment of hypersonic missile systems to the Middle East region.

The strategically vital Strait of Hormuz has remained essentially blocked since hostilities commenced in late February. This closure has severely restricted the transportation of crude oil, natural gas, and oil products through this critical global shipping corridor.

Brent crude has now appreciated more than 100% year-to-date and continues a nine-consecutive-day advance, representing its longest winning streak since May 2022.

Bitcoin experienced a 2.1% decline to $75,633 during Asian market sessions. The cryptocurrency is down 3% for the week and remains approximately $50,000 below its record high of $126,000 established in October 2025.

During April, Bitcoin has consolidated within a $74,000 to $78,000 range, despite oil prices ascending from $98 to $126 per barrel.

Alternative Cryptocurrencies Face Broad Selling Pressure

Ether decreased 3.4% to $2,244, recording a 4.4% weekly decline. XRP retreated 2.1% to $1.37. Solana dropped 2.6% to $82.62, while BNB declined 1.9% to $615.

Dogecoin emerged as the sole top-10 cryptocurrency excluding stablecoins to register gains, climbing 3.8% daily and 10.1% weekly to reach $0.10.

Fernando Lillo, director at cryptocurrency exchange Zoomex, indicated that Bitcoin’s ability to surpass $80,000 hinges on the reduction of war-related market premiums. He emphasized that Brent crude falling beneath $100 per barrel would be necessary, noting the direct correlation between the two assets.

Lillo further described a potential scenario in which the Trump administration might ease the Iran blockade, positioning it as recognition of constructive Iranian actions, which he suggested could propel Bitcoin toward $85,000.

Technology Sector Results Generate Divergent Market Reactions

U.S. equity futures displayed mixed performance on Thursday. S&P 500 futures advanced 0.2%, while Nasdaq 100 futures declined 0.2% and Dow futures dropped 0.6%.

Meta shares tumbled nearly 6% following the disclosure of lower-than-anticipated capital expenditure projections and modest user growth figures. Microsoft shares remained relatively unchanged despite surpassing revenue and earnings expectations.

Alphabet climbed 6% on robust revenue performance and strong Google Cloud expansion. Amazon advanced 4% supported by impressive cloud computing metrics.

Apple is scheduled to announce earnings results following Thursday’s market closure.

The Federal Reserve maintained interest rates unchanged within the 3.5% to 3.75% target range. Fed Chair Jerome Powell indicated his intention to continue beyond his current term, referencing ongoing legal challenges confronting the central bank.

XRP has seen a sharp rise in bullish social sentiment after Rakuten Wallet launched new XRP features in Japan. 

The update allows users to convert Rakuten loyalty points into XRP and use the asset for payments. Rakuten Wallet has launched XRP spot trading and payment features for users in Japan. The update allows customers to convert Rakuten loyalty points into XRP through the mobile app.

Users can also use XRP for payments at more than 5 million merchant locations across Japan. Payments are made through QR codes linked to Rakuten’s wider retail network.

XRP gains exposure to Rakuten users

RippleX described the launch as one of the largest retail deployments of XRP to date. Rakuten Pay has about 44 million active users, giving XRP access to a large consumer base.

The Rakuten ecosystem also has more than 3 trillion loyalty points in circulation. That equals about $23 billion in points that can now be converted into XRP.

Santiment reports rising XRP sentiment

Santiment said XRP is now seeing its second-highest bullish sentiment across social media in two years. The platform linked the rise partly to the Rakuten integration.

Santiment said these events do not often cause instant price breakouts. It added that price effects may appear after early excitement and FOMO cool down.

Despite the adoption news, XRP traded at $1.37 at the time of reporting. The token fell 1.77% in 24 hours and 3.66% over the past week.

XRP has a market cap of about $84.42 billion, with 62 billion tokens in circulation. Santiment noted that XRP’s market value has declined about 55% over the past nine months.

Rakuten Wallet is also running a promotion for early users. Customers who buy 30,000 yen or more in XRP can receive 500 yen worth of XRP, while those buying 100,000 yen or more can receive 1,500 yen.