The outcome of the United States' midterm elections could reshape the prospects for the stalled CLARITY Act, but "real movement" in US digital asset regulation over the next few years would come from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Treasury Department, rather than from Congress, according to Ma, the expert cited in BitcoinKE's analysis.

Ma said the agencies were increasingly engaging with crypto projects, although such engagement does not offer the long-term certainty the industry had hoped to secure through legislation.

"The long-term goal, of course, remains a statute that cannot be reversed every time a government changes," Ma said.

The uncertainty is also weighing on institutional investors, according to Michael Ho, co-founder of D3, the team behind the Doma Protocol.

"With the market structure bill stalled, US crypto policy continues to rest on agency guidance that a future administration can reverse, and that keeps serious capital waiting," Ho said. "Whatever the result, clear rules written into law are what will bring institutional capital into tokenized real-world assets."

Agencies Take Center Stage as Congress Stalls

The SEC and the CFTC have emerged as key players in determining how digital assets are classified and regulated in the United States. The distinction matters in practice: the SEC administers federal securities laws, while the CFTC oversees US commodity derivatives markets, so how an asset is classified shapes which regime's rules apply to it.

The SEC proposed a framework for crypto fundraising in August 2026, including exemptions for certain token offerings and a safe harbor from treatment as investment contracts. In September, the agency updated staff guidance covering token buybacks, crypto networks and staking receipt tokens.

The CFTC, meanwhile, submitted a crypto market regulatory plan for White House review on September 17, two days after the Senate failed to advance the CLARITY Act. The two agencies have long shared overlapping jurisdiction over digital assets in the United States, a dynamic that has fueled an extended debate over which of them should supervise the sector — a question the stalled CLARITY Act was designed to resolve.

Durability of Agency-Led Reforms in Question

The regulatory uncertainty has raised concerns among crypto companies about the durability of agency-led reforms and the risk of a return to enforcement-driven policymaking.

The industry has increasingly sought clearer rules governing digital asset markets, trading platforms and non-custodial protocols, with executives warning that prolonged uncertainty could push innovation and investment offshore.

Near-term markers for the agency-led path include the White House's decision on the CFTC's submitted plan and how the SEC's proposed fundraising framework progresses — steps that move forward without a congressional vote.

BitcoinKE's related reporting has tracked the legislative setbacks in detail: the CLARITY Act failed to advance in the Senate; a former CFTC chairman argued that American banks need regulatory clarity more than crypto companies; US retail crypto regulation lacks investor protections following the CLARITY Act's failure; and a US Senator has said the next realistic window for the legislation may not open until 2030.

The outcome of the midterms could therefore influence not only the direction of crypto legislation but also the regulatory environment under which US digital asset businesses operate. In the absence of a statute, US digital asset policy remains anchored to agency guidance that a future administration could reverse — the uncertainty both Ma and Ho described.