Wintermute policy chief puts Clarity Act 2026 passage odds at ~30%

Wintermute policy head Ron Hammond put the odds of the U.S. Crypto Clarity Act passing in 2026 at about 30%, despite signs of momentum in Washington. He pointed to bank opposition over stablecoin yield and a legislative calendar that keeps slipping even as some lawmakers float an as-early-as-April-20 vote target.

Key Takeaways

• Wintermute’s Ron Hammond pegged the Clarity Act’s 2026 passage probability at roughly 30%.
• Bank pushback is the core obstacle, with negotiations stuck on whether stablecoins should be allowed to offer yield.
• The bill is designed to hard-code SEC vs. CFTC oversight and draw clearer lines between securities and commodities in digital assets.
• A vote has been discussed for as early as April 20, but Hammond warned the schedule has been fluid for months and “These dates are moving.”

Hammond Puts 2026 Clarity Act Odds at ~30% as Vote Talk Swirls Around April 20

Ron Hammond, head of policy at crypto market maker Wintermute, put the Clarity Act’s odds of passage in 2026 at around 30% in comments published April 11. For traders, that framing matters as much as the bill itself. A market-structure catalyst can be real while the near-term tape stays headline-driven, especially when a prominent policy operator is openly signaling low confidence.

Hammond described the process as uneven, saying, “There are a lot of moving parts,” even as lawmakers push to move the bill through committee. Some lawmakers have discussed a vote as early as April 20, but Hammond’s warning was blunt: “These dates are moving.” The message is timing risk first, substance second until an actual committee calendar is posted.

Probability signals around the bill are also noisy. Hammond’s 30% estimate was positioned alongside a Punchbowl survey of lobbyists and staffers that put odds at 26%, while Kalshi was described as hovering “just above even odds.” That spread is less a consensus than a reminder that the market is still guessing at the political path.

What the Clarity Act Would Codify: SEC vs. CFTC Lines and the Securities-vs.-Commodities Question

The Clarity Act is a U.S. crypto market-structure bill aimed at codifying how the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission oversee digital assets. The practical target is the securities-versus-commodities question, plus clearer rules for how assets can be traded, custodied, and regulated.

If it advances, the bill functions as structural de-risking for U.S.-exposed listings and compliance-sensitive flows. The current framework is described as fragmented and uncertain, a setup that has kept many large asset managers, banks, and pension funds on the sidelines due to legal and compliance risk. That is why even incremental committee progress can move sentiment, even when passage odds remain low.

Stablecoin Yield Is the Sticking Point: Why Banks Are the Central Blocker

Hammond identified traditional banks as the biggest obstacle, centering the dispute on whether stablecoins should be allowed to offer yield. He said multiple parties have tried to find a compromise, including “Coinbase (COIN), the White House, the bill’s drafters,” but added: “But at every turn, the banks refuse to give way.”

That makes stablecoin yield the key fault line for traders monitoring this story. The most important incremental update is not another generic “progress” headline. It is whether compromise language on yield emerges that banks can live with.

Hammond also referenced a report from the Council of Economic Advisers that pushed back on bank opposition, but said negotiations remain stuck. His read on the endgame was cautious: “Even with broader macro pressures, it’s hard to see how the banks get happy here.”

The ‘Yield Deal’ Failed, a New Draft Circulates, and the Calendar Keeps Slipping

The yield fight has already broken at least one attempted compromise. Hammond said a proposed stablecoin “yield deal” floated roughly two weeks before April 11 failed to satisfy either side, and that a new version is now circulating.

The forward path is now a three-variable problem. First, whether an actual committee or vote schedule materializes around the discussed as-early-as-April-20 window, versus more slippage consistent with Hammond’s “These dates are moving” comment. Second, whether any public details emerge on the newly circulating yield draft, since the terms of both the failed compromise and the new version have not been specified. Third, whether stakeholders signal banks are softening or hardening on yield, because that is the bottleneck that determines whether the bill’s “viable, if narrow, path forward” becomes real.

Hammond also flagged a mid-year political risk: scrutiny around former President Donald Trump’s crypto-related dealings could become a June flashpoint that complicates Democratic support if it intensifies. “All of that becomes another headache,” he said.

Why This Fight Over Stablecoin Yield Matters More Than the Headline Odds

I treat Hammond’s 30% as a useful anchor for positioning expectations, not a forecast to trade blindly. The setup still looks more like a sentiment catalyst than a fundamental shift until the yield language stops being a veto point and a real committee schedule prints.

The threshold that matters is whether stablecoin yield compromise text becomes concrete enough to move banks off “no,” because if that holds, the setup starts to look structural rather than narrative-driven for U.S. listings and compliance-sensitive liquidity.

Sources

• CoinDesk