White House Crypto Talks Continue as End-of-Month Deadline Nears

Crypto talks at the White House continued this week as administration officials pressed banking representatives and digital asset firms to narrow their differences before an end-of-month deadline. Despite multiple rounds of negotiations, the parties did not reach final agreements on key elements of stablecoin legislation. While participants describe the discussions as constructive, disagreements over stablecoin yield rules and issuer parity remain unresolved.

The ongoing discussions are tied to the CLARITY Act (H.R. 3633) and its stablecoin framework, which passed the House and now awaits Senate action. The bill aims to define how payment stablecoins would be supervised in the United States. At the center of the debate is whether non-bank issuers should be allowed to offer certain reward mechanisms to token holders. That question has shaped much of the recent progress and tension inside those meetings.

Progress in the Negotiations

Officials involved in the talks at White House have signaled movement on limited incentive structures. According to policy documents and meeting summaries, policymakers appear open to allowing transaction-based stablecoin rewards if they tie to payment activity rather than passive holding. This distinction has become central to the evolving stablecoin reward proposal.

The shift suggests that regulators are attempting to draw a line between cashback-style incentives and deposit-style returns. By narrowing the scope of acceptable benefits, negotiators have moved away from an all-or-nothing debate. That approach reflects an effort to preserve innovation while addressing financial stability concerns.

There has also been progress on enforcement language. Reports indicate that draft provisions include potential civil penalties of up to $500,000 per violation per day for attempts to circumvent any final restrictions. The inclusion of enforcement mechanisms suggests that discussions have advanced beyond principle and into legislative drafting.

Participants have described the recent sessions as structured and substantive. The continuation of stablecoin talks into a third round indicates that the process remains active, even if it has not resulted in an agreement yet.

>>> Related: Senate Committee Vote Advances Crypto Market Structure Bill

Where Talks Still Stall

Despite incremental movement, the stablecoin yield debate remains the primary sticking point. Banks argue that deposit-style yield stablecoins resemble interest-bearing accounts and should therefore be subject to banking regulation. Crypto firms contend that they can design certain yield models without replicating traditional deposits.

This disagreement has produced a deadlock for now. While transaction-based incentives may be acceptable, the broader question of whether stablecoin issuers can offer yield at all remains unsettled. That issue continues to divide participants in the White House crypto discussions.

Another unresolved area concerns regulatory parity. Banking representatives voiced concerns about a competitive imbalance if non-bank entities can distribute returns without complying with bank capital and supervisory standards. Industry groups respond that overly restrictive rules could limit market development and slow digital dollar innovation.

Definitions also remain under discussion. Policymakers must determine how to classify different forms of incentives under the CLARITY Act’s stablecoin framework. The boundary between rewards and interest has not yet been formally codified, which complicates efforts to finalize statutory language.

>>> Related: White House Crypto Meeting Leaves Stablecoin Yield Unresolved

Deadline Pressure Builds

An end-of-month deadline has added urgency to the crypto talks at the White House. Administration officials have encouraged both sides to reach a consensus before legislative momentum slows. While no formal cutoff has been announced, the timeline has become a reference point in recent discussions.

The broader CLARITY Act framework aims to reduce regulatory fragmentation. Lawmakers and regulators have emphasized the need for clearer supervision of payment stablecoins. However, progress in stablecoin yield negotiations remains uneven.

If the current stablecoin yield debate cannot be resolved, the legislation could face delay or require further revision. Participants have not indicated that talks are collapsing, but the absence of a final compromise underscores the complexity of the issues under review.

While the latest White House policy negotiations demonstrate that engagement between banks and crypto firms is ongoing, the central divide over yield and issuer authority persists. As the end-of-month deadline approaches, negotiators must determine whether a limited stablecoin reward proposal can bridge the gap or whether the impasse will extend into the next phase of legislative deliberation.

For now, the discussions continue without a definitive outcome. The Administration’s mediation efforts remain active, but the path to agreement on stablecoin legislation is still being negotiated.