The setback in the legislative process of the Market Clarity Act led to the White House stablecoin meeting on February 2nd, which mainly discussed the controversial issue of stablecoin returns/rewards in the US Crypto Market Structure Act, especially the CLARITY Act. The meeting was pushed by the White House Digital Asset Advisory Committee to break the long-standing deadlock between banks and the cryptocurrency industry (stuck in the Senate for nearly half a year) and push for relevant legislation to be passed as soon as possible, but the meeting still failed to reach a consensus. The core controversy between the banking and cryptocurrency industries is: Does payment stablecoins allow for additional income or rewards (such as interest, dividends, reward mechanisms), and can third-party platforms (such as Coinbase and other exchanges) provide such income to users. 1. The views of the cryptocurrency industry (Coinbase, Circle, Ripple, Kraken, Paxos, Tether, Blockchain Association, etc.): 1) Strongly supports allowing revenue, believing that it is the key to attracting users and driving innovation. 2) Prohibiting rewards would put crypto platforms at a competitive disadvantage and favor traditional banks. 3) The size of the stablecoin market is increasing, and the profit mechanism is conducive to the development of scenarios such as DeFi and cross-border payments. 4) Coinbase and other companies have made huge profits from stablecoins such as USDC (accounting for 56% of their net income in Q3 2025), and the ban on rewards directly affects their business models. 2. The banking industry (American Bankers Association, Banking Policy Institute, Consumer Bankers Association, Financial Services Forum, Independent Community Bankers Association, etc.) is almost unanimously strongly opposed to allowing stablecoin payments for benefits or rewards. The banking industry's viewpoint is: 1) Core deposits may experience significant loss: Concerns about a large amount of deposits being lost to stablecoins 2) Threatening financial stability, community banking survival, and potentially triggering systemic risks. The American Bankers Association (ABA), representing national banks, points out that stablecoin returns will attract funds to flow from traditional banks to cryptocurrency platforms, especially impacting the core deposits of community banks, directly weakening the lending capacity of banks, and affecting the credit supply for small businesses and households. 3) Legal loopholes must be closed Several bank representatives and economist Andrew Nigrinis (economist, independent analyst) emphasized that even if the issuer cannot pay interest, intermediary platforms, wallets, or exchanges may still provide returns. He suggested clearly defining profits and rewards as interest, plugging all loopholes in "indirect payments", and maintaining the stability of the bank deposit system 4) Severe loan impact The Independent Community Banking Association (ICBA), an association focused on community banks and local economies, estimates that if income based stablecoins are allowed, community banks may lose $1.3 trillion in deposits and corresponding loans may decrease by $850 billion. Nigrinis added that even though stablecoins currently have no returns, they have led to a decrease of about 6% in community bank deposits, corresponding to approximately $250 billion in loan losses, particularly affecting small credit institutions. 5) Financial system stability is higher than innovation The Banking Policy Institute (BPI), representing large, regional, and foreign banks operating in the United States, reminds that payment returns may increase systemic risk and even create pressure similar to the 2008 financial crisis. The bank emphasizes that innovation cannot come at the expense of financial stability. The meeting did not reach a final agreement, but bank representatives clearly expressed their position during the negotiations. All parties agree to continue negotiations before the end of February to create conditions for the Senate Banking Committee to advance the market structure bill. After the meeting, bank representatives jointly stated that they will continue to communicate with the White House and lawmakers to ensure that any stablecoin related legislation does not weaken the core lending function of community banks, while maintaining the financial system. The current bleak cryptocurrency market is partly due to the market's response to regulatory uncertainty. The ongoing stalemate and restricted innovation in cryptocurrency may temporarily alleviate the pressure on bank deposits, but the trend of intensifying industry confrontation is inevitable. If the clear bill is not passed, the SEC innovation exemption is likely to continue to be postponed. We need to closely monitor the progress of the next negotiation between the banking and cryptocurrency industries. If both parties can reach an agreement, some provisions of the bill may need to be adjusted. However, the clear bill's ultimate passage is also a major step forward. This White House stablecoin meeting is just a setback, not a suspension. The trend is irreversible, and specific measures can be adjusted. The clear passage of the bill in the future is a rough idea, but this game process may be very tedious. New gameplay on the US stock market, starting from Bitget: http://(bitget. com)/markets/stocks