Crypto
US House Committee Introduces 114-Page Crypto Tax Bill
A 114-page crypto tax bill arrives as CLARITY faces a crucial vote, setting up a fresh fight over digital asset rules, taxes, and federal definitions.
19h ago 4,280
BLOCKINSIDERLoadingA 114-page crypto tax bill arrives as CLARITY faces a crucial vote, setting up a fresh fight over digital asset rules, taxes, and federal definitions.
Washington moved on crypto taxes while the industry was watching a different bill entirely. House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith released a 114-page measure late Monday night.
The Digital Asset Tax Certainty Act would rewrite how the Internal Revenue Code treats tokens. It lands one day before the Senate's cloture vote on the CLARITY Act as Committee members take it up on Wednesday.
The bill is organized into seven titles and amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Its first title targets friction in everyday spending.
No gain or loss would be recognized on network or transaction fees of $10 or less. Traders and users with annual transfers above $5,000 are excluded. Qualified dollar stablecoins would be valued at redemption value, erasing most everyday gains.
Holders could also elect simplified net accounting for widely traded assets of the same type. Those provisions take effect after 2026 and 2027, depending on the section.
Domestically, within the US, the tax code would do regulatory work. Title VI writes the first comprehensive statutory definitions of digital assets into federal law. If CLARITY stalls, agencies and courts borrow that vocabulary by default.
That said, this Bill leaves crypto in a hybrid state. Wash sale and constructive sale rules treat tokens like securities. Mark-to-market elections and the trading safe harbor treat them like commodities. Spot market jurisdiction stays unresolved. Stablecoin redemption-value treatment matters more than the $10 headline. It removes the accounting reason not to pay in dollar tokens.
Globally, structuring incentives flip. Extending the trading safe harbor lets offshore funds trade through US desks without US trade-or-business status. That pulls execution onshore.
Little changes before 2028. The mining deferral remains contested, and floor time is scarce. Near-term impact is signaling that the US now competes on tax, not just licensing.
No, the two bills do not collide head-on. CLARITY rewrites market structure and splits oversight between the SEC and CFTC. Smith's measure sits in the tax code and never touches agency jurisdiction.
Instead, friction appears in language and timing. Title VI creates its own definitions of digital assets, tokenized assets, and stablecoins. CLARITY defines digital commodities separately, so one asset could carry two federal labels.
Timing is the sharpest conflict.
The markup lands as the Senate votes on cloture for CLARITY. Tax relief arriving before the market structure would invert the sequence the industry lobbied for. Treasury and the IRS would still write the implementing rules. Regulators would need to reconcile both vocabularies before either framework functions cleanly.
Representative Steven Horsford, whose bipartisan PARITY Act supplied much of the text, has framed the effort around guardrails. He argued that the smallest crypto transaction can trigger a tax calculation today. He said other areas invite abuse.
Congressman Max Miller has been blunter about the code itself. He said America's tax code "has failed to keep pace with modern financial technology." He argued that the package protects consumers making everyday purchases.
Furthermore, wash sale changes are scored to raise roughly $2.07 billion over a decade. The mining deferral would cost about $2.96 billion. Passage this year looks unlikely, with little House floor time before November.
The upcoming vote on Wednesday will decide whether crypto tax policy can stay bipartisan.
No comments yet
Be the first to share your take when accounts launch.
