Crypto vs. banks: Dispute over stablecoin rewards comes to a head in the White House
- In the White House, the crypto industry and major banks continued to wrestle over the rules for stablecoin rewards in the Clarity Act, but the second meeting also ended without agreement.
- Banks and associations are pushing for a far-reaching ban on returns and interest rates for stablecoins with a paper.
Yesterday, Tuesday, representatives of the crypto industry and large US banks met again in the White House to debate the biggest point of contention in the Clarity Act: stablecoin “rewards” and the question of which activities should be considered permitted in the future. Participants described the round as more constructive than the first time, but in the end no one went home with an agreement.
Crypto industry vs. banking industry
Journalist Eleanor Terrett, citing those involved, wrote that this time there were fewer people at the table and that concrete deal details were discussed more quickly. Both sides called the conversation “productive” – “but this time too there was no compromise until the end,” said Terrett.
In terms of content, the content became much more specific: The dispute was primarily about what would still be allowed in the future, i.e. what kind of rewards crypto companies would be allowed to offer if users held stablecoins.
According to Terrett, the crypto site wants to define the term “rewards” broadly, while banks and associations want to make it as narrow as possible. The next step is to continue “in the coming days,” although it remains unclear whether there will be another meeting before the end of the month. The White House called on both sides to find a solution by March 1st.
What made things even more explosive was a paper that banks and banking associations brought to yesterday’s meeting: “Yield and Interest Prohibition Principles”. It states that stablecoins are designed as payment instruments in the GENIUS Act and that market structure laws should therefore enshrine a strict ban on returns and interest rates in order to prevent outflows of deposits from the traditional banking system.
Essentially, the paper calls for a very far-reaching ban on “tying any form of financial or non-financial consideration” to stablecoin holders – in connection with the “purchase, use, ownership, possession, custody, holding or retention” of a payment stablecoin.
And then comes the sentence that seems like a red line from the crypto industry’s perspective: Proposed exceptions must therefore remain “extremely limited”. After all, the word exception is being used for the first time.
On top of that, the paper also includes enforcement powers for the supervisors, including civil fines, anti-avoidance rules, strict requirements for marketing and risk presentations as well as a mandatory study two years after entry into force, including possible follow-up regulation for “significant risks”.
NEW: Details from the White House stablecoin yield meeting, per banking and crypto sources in the room:
People on both sides called the meeting ‘productive,’ but, again, no compromise was reached by the end of the meeting. However, deal specifics were discussed in more detail… pic.twitter.com/w5nPlG1DLi
— Eleanor Terrett (@EleanorTerrett) February 11, 2026
Compromise in the air?
Ripple-Chefjurist Stuart Alderoty pointed after the meeting for movement:
“Today was a productive meeting at the White House – compromise is in the air. The clear, bipartisan momentum behind sensible crypto market structure legislation continues. We should act now – while the window is still open – and deliver a real win for consumers and America.”
Dan coiler, director of industry affairs at the Blockchain Association, showed felt less positive:
“After the first meeting at the White House last week, today’s follow-up shifted from broad discussion to serious problem-solving. This was a smaller, more focused session. Stablecoin rewards were the focus – but banks came not to negotiate on the text of the law, but with broad prohibitive principles, and that remains a key point of disagreement.”
CEO Summer Mersinger explained:
“The second White House meeting shows that the political drive behind bipartisan market structure legislation for digital assets remains. We are encouraged by the progress as stakeholders work constructively to resolve outstanding issues. We remain fully committed to translating this progress into legislation that positions the U.S. as a global innovation leader.”
No Comments