Eastern Standard Time, January 21, 2026, the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee is reported to be about to unveil the text of the cryptocurrency market structure bill, breaking through the legislative agenda in Washington. The real tension surrounding this yet-to-be-released text lies not in the technical details, but in the tug-of-war and redistribution of regulatory authority over digital assets between the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). On the same trading day, CEA Industries' stock price rose 2.91%, Coinbase slightly increased by 0.12%, while other related stocks fluctuated. Coupled with Trump's high-profile support for crypto legislation and the slogan of "World Crypto Capital," the theme of "policy expectations heating up" became a common topic in the market and public discourse. This article will focus on this much-anticipated "market structure bill," outlining the regulatory power landscape behind it, the fate of ambiguous assets, the emotional resonance between stock prices and politics, and how it may rewrite the narrative framework of the crypto market in the coming years.
Agriculture Committee Takes the Lead: Who Will Dominate the Digital Asset Order
● Traditional Connection: The reason the Senate Agriculture Committee is taking the lead on the issue of cryptocurrency market structure is largely due to its long-standing institutional ties with the CFTC—the regulation of agricultural and commodity derivatives has always belonged to this system. Now, "digital commodities" are viewed as a new type of bulk asset, thus gaining political and institutional legitimacy by being included in its agenda. This means that whoever leads the legislation is, to some extent, laying the groundwork for who will hold the interpretive authority over regulation.
● Expectation of Redrawing Lines: This "market structure bill" is widely interpreted by the market and industry as an opportunity to redefine the regulatory boundaries of digital assets between the CFTC and SEC—which tokens are considered commodities, which should be treated as securities, and whether the future will be characterized by "overlapping regulation" or "division of responsibilities" are all hanging over this text. Although the specific terms remain completely confidential, the mere act of "redrawing lines" is enough to change the industry's medium- to long-term expectations regarding the U.S. regulatory path.
● Jurisdictional Conflicts Await Confirmation: Speculation has arisen regarding whether there will be institutional jurisdictional conflicts between the Senate Agriculture Committee and the Banking Committee in digital asset legislation, but relevant information is still in a verification pending state. The only thing that can be confirmed at this stage is that once multiple committees focus on the same asset class, the pace of legislative advancement and the final form of the text may vary. This should not be over-interpreted, nor should specific power dynamics be deduced based on unverified claims.
● Symbolic Significance Greater than Short-term Implementation: From the perspective of legislative rhythm and the inertia of regulatory agency competition, the real impact of the Agriculture Committee's actions will be more reflected in the symbolic significance of long-term regulatory competition—it signals that Congress is willing to move from "post-enforcement" to "pre-line drawing," rather than immediately changing market operational guidelines. For the industry, this feels more like the starting bell for a new round of rule negotiations rather than a final judgment.
From Meme Coins to Token Listings: The Gray Areas Targeted by the Bill
● Key Issues: According to existing public information, the core issues focused on by this market structure bill include: whether certain meme coins should be included in the category of "digital commodities," how different tokens should be classified, and how to design the listing and circulation rules for assets once classified. In simple terms, it attempts to answer a question: from meme tokens to serious protocol tokens, which can be freely traded under "commodity logic," and which must comply with the issuance and disclosure constraints of "securities logic."
● Compliance Vacuum: Meme coins and many long-tail tokens currently exist in a regulatory definition that is extremely ambiguous—neither clearly identified as commodities nor systematically included in the securities framework, thus creating a compliance vacuum that exists in fact but lacks rules. This state has led exchanges, project parties, and investors to long-term game in a gray area: once traced back to the illegal issuance or sale of securities, past actions may face the risk of retrospective concentrated clearing.
● Classification Affects All Parties: Once more tokens are clearly classified as "digital commodities" or "securities," the impact on exchanges, project parties, and investors will be systemic. For exchanges, commodity attributes may mean a closer path to derivatives and commodity licenses, while securities attributes imply a closer alignment with traditional financial licenses and reporting obligations; for project parties, commodity attributes help reduce issuance compliance costs, while securities attributes require more resources for information disclosure and holder protection; for investors, the classification of assets will directly determine on which platforms and under what thresholds and leverage tools they can participate.
● Refusal to Speculate on Clause Details: It must be emphasized repeatedly that the current bill text has not been released, and any claims about specific clauses, proportional divisions, or technical regulatory divisions are unverified inferences. Whether it is the boundaries of the definition of "digital commodities" or the assumptions about securities regulatory exemptions, nothing should be set in stone before the official text is available, nor should it be used as a basis for trading decisions. The direction of legislation can be discussed, but technical details can only be kept open at this stage.
Stock Prices Reacting Early: The Crypto Sector Testing Waters Amid Policy Expectations
● Mild Bullish Signals: Amid the intertwining of bill expectations and political statements, the U.S. stock market's crypto concept sector did not experience a frenzied surge but instead showed a mild exploratory bullish trend. For example, CEA Industries rose 2.91% that day, while Coinbase Global, as one of the leading compliant platforms, only slightly increased by 0.12%, indicating that funds did not chase prices blindly based on "positive news," but rather made differentiated bets among different targets.
● Structural Bets: Looking at the broader performance of crypto concept stocks, the rises and falls are inconsistent; some targets rebounded, while some stocks consolidated or even corrected, indicating that incremental funds have not formed a unified expectation of "regulatory good news." Currently, it resembles structural bets on legislative progress—funds preferentially favor those companies more likely to benefit under the new compliance framework while remaining cautious about marginalized targets. Legislative expectations are amplifying differentiation rather than indiscriminately raising sector valuations.
● Pricing of Regulatory Certainty: For many institutional investors, "progress in legislation" itself is seen as a signal: regulation is no longer solely reliant on enforcement actions but is attempting to provide rules that can be followed in advance. This increased predictability of regulation is interpreted as a precursor to a clearer compliance path, beneficial for medium- to long-term capital allocation—even if short-term price fluctuations are limited, the discount rates in valuation models and policy discounts will be recalibrated on a psychological level.
● Emotional Testing Rather than Clause Pricing: Currently, every rise and fall in the market reflects more of an emotional test surrounding "legislative advancement" and "political alignment," rather than a rigorous valuation based on the bill's details. After all, in a phase where even the basic definitions have not been made public, the market cannot quantify specific classifications, compliance costs, or business constraints. The current stock price reaction can be seen as a discounted subscription to future narratives rather than a discounted calculation of the clauses themselves.
Trump Bets on Crypto: Political Alignment Amplifies National Narrative
● Clear Statement: Surrounding this legislative progress, Trump's camp stands out—he publicly stated that by supporting legislation for the digital asset industry, he aims to ensure that the U.S. becomes the "World Crypto Capital." This statement has been confirmed by multiple sources, releasing a clear political signal: in the cycle of elections and power restructuring, the crypto industry is no longer just a technical issue but has been elevated to the level of national competition and industrial policy.
● Internal Republican Route: This high-profile support provides a strong "top-level endorsement" for the crypto-friendly route within the Republican Party. In the Senate negotiations, Republican lawmakers are more motivated to present themselves as representatives of "innovation-friendly" and "industry-friendly" by pushing for the market structure bill to include clearer boundaries and exemption clauses, delivering political results of "reducing uncertainty" to both the industry and voters. Conversely, this will also put pressure on more conservative factions.
● National Competition Narrative: Market discourse quickly linked Trump's statements with the progress of the Agriculture Committee's bill, constructing a narrative framework of "the U.S. is joining the global crypto race"—once the regulatory path becomes clearer, the U.S. could leverage its capital market depth and compliance infrastructure advantages to attract global crypto businesses to concentrate domestically. This national-level competition story elevates the symbolic significance surrounding legislation and amplifies the market's imagination of a "regulatory shift towards friendliness."
● Position Differentiation and Policy Fluctuation: However, the political stance surrounding digital assets is highly polarized within the U.S., with some factions emphasizing investor protection and financial stability, holding a skeptical or even hostile attitude towards industry expansion. This division lays the groundwork for potential fluctuations and reversals in future policies: even if the current political winds lean towards supporting legislative advancement, subsequent execution, supporting rules, and enforcement standards may still experience significant volatility with election cycles and regulatory events.
Regulatory Game and Industry Self-Rescue: Responses from Exchanges and Projects
● Compliance and Layout Reconstruction: In the face of the institutional reconstruction expectations brought by the "market structure bill," major exchanges and leading projects will inevitably need to anticipate different scenarios for their listing strategies, compliance paths, and regional layouts. Which types of assets can still be smoothly listed in the U.S. market, which businesses need to be transferred to other jurisdictions, and how to balance global user demands with local regulatory pressures will become core topics of high-level discussions.
● From Gray Area to Self-Proof: Once the boundaries between "digital commodities" and "securities" become clearer, the entire industry will likely shift from the past habitual "gray area" mode to a strategy emphasizing proactive self-proof of compliance. For example, conducting legal analyses and third-party assessments on questionable assets in advance, restructuring issuance and governance to reduce the risk of being classified as securities, and reserving more ample compliance buffer periods. This shift will raise entry barriers but is expected to reduce the risk of retrospective concentrated crackdowns.
● Potential Benefits for Compliance Platforms: In this structural reshaping, platforms like Coinbase Global, which have already deeply invested in compliance paths, are viewed by many analysts as potential long-term beneficiaries—they will convert their existing investments in licenses, risk control, compliance teams, and regulatory dialogue channels into a competitive moat under the new regulatory environment. However, in the absence of the bill text and the management's public stance being unclear, external interpretations of their strategic adjustments should not be overly extended, nor should any personal judgments of executives be fabricated.
● Survival Lines for Small and Medium Platforms and Long-Tail Projects: Relatively speaking, second- and third-tier trading platforms and long-tail projects will face more direct survival pressures and clearing risks under the new rules. Once certain tokens are clearly classified into stricter regulatory categories, these entities may struggle with compliance costs, legal risks, and business viability. For projects that have not yet established solid compliance capabilities and user barriers, this round of legislation may raise the question of "whether they can continue to exist," rather than "how high their valuation is."
The Bill is Just the Beginning: A New Order in Crypto is Still Being Built
The true symbolic significance of the bill lies in its indication that U.S. regulation is beginning to shift from a heavy reliance on post-enforcement and judicial precedents to attempting to achieve "pre-line drawing" through legislation, providing the industry with predictable boundaries. However, at this stage, where the text has not yet been released and the implementation details are still unknown, all judgments about the final order remain in the blueprint phase. The current market prices and sentiments are more about pricing the improvement in regulatory predictability rather than engaging in rational valuation games over specific clauses. Moving forward, the real key to determining the "quality" and implementation speed of the bill will be the negotiations between different committees within the Senate, as well as the collaboration and power distribution with regulatory agencies like the CFTC and SEC. For investors, in a phase of extremely incomplete information, a more rational strategy is to continuously track regulatory trends and political winds, understanding the structural impacts that different versions of legislation may bring, rather than prematurely betting on imagined clause details. A new order in crypto is being built, but the true reconstruction of power and market landscapes has only just begun.
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
