The U.S. Senate Banking Committee has confirmed that it will not hold a markup hearing on digital asset market structure legislation before the end of 2025, dealing a setback to the crypto industry’s hopes for a comprehensive new regulatory framework before year’s end. Committee Chairman Tim Scott announced that bipartisan negotiations are ongoing but require more time, pushing any substantive action into early 2026.
The delay, while not entirely unexpected, underscores the complexity of crafting legislation that would fundamentally reshape how federal regulators oversee the cryptocurrency industry. The market structure bill is intended to define the respective roles of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in policing digital asset markets, a question that has generated intense debate among lawmakers, regulators, and industry participants.
TL;DR
- Senate Banking Committee postpones crypto market structure markup to early 2026
- Chairman Tim Scott cites ongoing bipartisan negotiations as the reason for delay
- The bill would designate the CFTC as primary spot market regulator for digital commodities
- Congress must prioritize government funding after the holiday break
- Midterm election pressures may further compress the legislative timeline
Scott’s Statement and Bipartisan Dynamics
In an official statement released on December 15, a spokesperson for the Senate Banking Committee emphasized that Chairman Scott has maintained a consistent commitment to producing bipartisan legislation. “From the outset, Chairman Scott has been clear that this effort should be bipartisan,” the spokesperson said. “He has consistently and patiently engaged in good-faith discussions to produce a strong bipartisan product that provides clarity for the digital asset industry and also makes America the crypto capital of the world.”
The committee confirmed that it “looks forward to a markup in early 2026,” signaling that the legislation remains a priority despite the postponement. Multiple drafts of the market structure bill have circulated through the Banking Committee, which oversees the SEC, while the Senate Agriculture Committee, which has jurisdiction over the CFTC, has been working on parallel provisions.
The bipartisan nature of the negotiations has been both a strength and a complication. While there is broad agreement that regulatory clarity is needed, Democrats and Republicans remain divided on several key issues, including the scope of SEC authority over certain tokens, consumer protection requirements, and the degree to which crypto exchanges should be permitted to offer yield-bearing products to stablecoin holders.
What the Market Structure Bill Would Do
The market structure legislation represents the most ambitious attempt by Congress to create a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets since the GENIUS Act established stablecoin rules earlier in 2025. The bill is designed to address several longstanding issues that have plagued the industry.
First, it would designate the CFTC as the primary spot market regulator for digital commodities, ending years of jurisdictional ambiguity between the CFTC and the SEC. Under current law, the CFTC primarily oversees derivatives markets, while the SEC regulates securities. The blurry line between what constitutes a commodity and what constitutes a security in the digital asset space has created enforcement uncertainty and deterred institutional participation.
Second, the legislation would more clearly define how existing securities laws apply to digital assets, potentially establishing a new classification framework that accounts for the unique characteristics of tokens that may start as investment contracts but evolve into decentralized utility instruments over time. SEC Chair Paul Atkins has separately announced plans for a “token taxonomy” to address this classification challenge.
Third, the bill would establish registration requirements and operational standards for crypto exchanges, custodians, and other intermediaries, creating a clear path for businesses to operate within the law rather than navigating a patchwork of enforcement actions and guidance documents.
The Legislative Calendar Challenge
The timing of the delay is particularly significant given the congressional calendar. When lawmakers return from the holiday recess in January, their immediate priority will be funding the federal government. The current continuing resolution expires on January 30, and avoiding a government shutdown will consume significant legislative bandwidth in the opening weeks of the new session.
Even assuming a smooth funding process, the window for market structure legislation narrows considerably as 2026 progresses. Midterm elections in November 2026 will increasingly dominate congressional attention, and historically, major financial regulatory legislation becomes more difficult to pass as election season approaches. Lawmakers become more risk-averse and partisan tensions tend to escalate, making bipartisan cooperation on complex regulatory frameworks harder to sustain.
The Senate Agriculture Committee, which shares jurisdiction over the bill through its oversight of the CFTC, faces its own scheduling constraints. Coordination between two committees with different priorities and leadership styles adds another layer of complexity to an already challenging legislative process.
Industry Reaction and Alternative Paths
The crypto industry’s response to the delay has been measured but disappointed. While trade associations and major companies acknowledge that getting the legislation right is more important than rushing it through, there is growing frustration with the pace of congressional action after years of promises.
Industry participants had hoped that the momentum generated by the passage of the GENIUS Act in 2025 would carry over into market structure legislation, creating a one-two punch of stablecoin regulation followed by broader market oversight. The delay disrupts that narrative, though supporters note that the underlying bipartisan support for regulatory clarity remains strong.
Some industry observers have suggested that regulatory agencies could use their existing authority to provide interim clarity while Congress works on the legislation. The SEC’s Crypto Task Force, established under Chair Atkins, has been actively developing guidance on token classification, custody requirements, and exchange regulation. Similarly, the CFTC under its incoming leadership has signaled a willingness to expand its oversight of crypto spot markets within its current authority.
Confirmation of Key Regulators Provides Context
The delay in market structure legislation coincides with significant personnel changes at the agencies that would be most affected by the bill. The Senate confirmed Michael Selig as the new chairman of the CFTC and Travis Hill as permanent chairman of the FDIC in a series of votes on December 18, installing permanent leadership at two agencies with significant crypto oversight responsibilities.
Selig, who has expressed support for a larger CFTC role in crypto regulation, is expected to begin implementing changes at the agency immediately, potentially using existing authority to create a more welcoming environment for digital asset businesses even before market structure legislation is finalized. His confirmation by a comfortable margin suggests bipartisan comfort with the direction he is likely to take the agency.
The confirmation of these key regulators means that even without new legislation, the regulatory landscape for crypto is likely to continue evolving in 2026 as agency leadership implements their policy priorities through rulemaking, guidance, and enforcement decisions.
Looking Ahead to 2026
Despite the setback, several factors suggest that market structure legislation remains achievable in 2026. The strong bipartisan support for the GENIUS Act demonstrates that Congress can pass comprehensive crypto legislation when the conditions are right. The FSOC’s 2025 report removing crypto from its threat list removes one of the political obstacles to action. And the confirmation of crypto-friendly leadership at the CFTC and FDIC creates regulatory partners who are aligned with the legislative vision.
The key question is whether the legislative calendar will cooperate. With government funding, the debt ceiling, and midterm election pressures all competing for congressional attention, market structure legislation will need strong champions and sustained momentum to reach the finish line.
Why This Matters
The Senate’s decision to delay the market structure markup is a reminder that transforming crypto regulation from a patchwork of enforcement actions into a coherent legislative framework is a marathon, not a sprint. The GENIUS Act proved that major crypto legislation is possible in the current political environment, but market structure reform is arguably more complex because it touches on fundamental questions about jurisdiction, classification, and the balance between innovation and investor protection.
For the crypto industry, the delay means another period of regulatory uncertainty, but also another opportunity to engage with lawmakers on the details of the legislation. The quality of the final bill matters more than the speed of its passage, and the extra time could produce stronger, more workable legislation that provides lasting clarity for the industry.
For investors and market participants, the message is that regulatory clarity is coming, but not as quickly as many had hoped. In the meantime, agency-level actions by the SEC, CFTC, and other regulators will continue to shape the operational environment, creating incremental progress toward the comprehensive framework that Congress is working to deliver.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or legal advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry significant risk, including the potential loss of principal. Readers should conduct their own research and consult with qualified financial and legal advisors before making any investment or business decisions. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Tim Scott blaming bipartisan negotiations for the delay is the classic Senate stall tactic. The truth is the SEC and CFTC jurisdictional fight is nowhere near resolved, and no amount of good faith discussions fixes the fundamental disagreement over which agency controls spot crypto markets. Pushing to 2026 just kicks the can past the holidays.
The fact that the Banking Committee and Agriculture Committee are both involved in negotiations tells you how messy the jurisdictional questions are. Two different Senate committees fighting over who gets oversight of digital assets while the industry just wants clarity. Classic Washington.
Designating the CFTC as primary spot market regulator for digital commodities makes far more sense than giving it to the SEC. The CFTC has a lighter touch regulatory philosophy and actual experience overseeing commodity markets. The SEC under Gensler proved it could not handle crypto without resorting to enforcement first, ask questions later.
The article correctly identifies the government funding priority as a real constraint. Congress faces a continuing resolution deadline right after the holiday break, and appropriations will eat up weeks of floor time. A crypto market structure bill is important to our community but it ranks well below avoiding a government shutdown in terms of political urgency.
Midterm election pressures compressing the legislative timeline is the part that worries me most. Once campaign season heats up, Congress basically stops doing anything controversial. Crypto regulation has enough opponents on both sides of the aisle that it qualifies as politically risky, which means it could get punted again.