Ahead of the Senate Banking Committee’s markup of the CLARITY Act on May 14, 2026, Senators submitted a series of amendments that could significantly impact DeFi technology, software developers, and users in the United States.

It is important to note that not every amendment will ultimately be considered or voted on, which means that, at the time of this blog’s publication, there is still a timely opportunity for stakeholders and community members to engage with their lawmakers to urge opposition to proposals that could undermine decentralized technology, self-custody, or protections for software developers.

Below is a breakdown of the amendments the DeFi Education Fund is closely monitoring and encouraging Senators to oppose*.

Amendment #16 — Senator Cortez Masto

[Re-writes the BRCA to turn it from a shield to a sword against developers]

Amendment #17 — Senator Cortez Masto

[Strikes protections for non-controlling developers in Section 302]

Amendment #22 — Senator Cortez Masto

[Strikes protections for non-controlling developers in Section 301]

Amendment #24 — Senator Kim

[Expands the definition of a “financial institution” in  31 USC 5312 to include digital asset businesses]

Amendment #27 — Senator Kim

[Expands BSA/AML obligations and certification requirements for “covered businesses” to “prevent illicit finance” through decentralized financial services platforms]

Amendment #32 — Senator Van Hollen

[Expands application of criminal code to DeFi developers who publish, distribute, deploy, administer, or constitute code that “facilitates” crime or who act with “reckless disregard for a substantial risk” the DeFi trading protocol is used in connection with a violation of 1956, 1957, 1960, or 2339C]

Amendment #33 — Senator Van Hollen

[Prohibits publishing, distributing, deploying, or constituting a DeFi trading protocol “for the purpose of facilitating” a violation of 1956, 1957, 1960, or 2339C]

Amendment #67 — Senator Warren

“…would exempt certain software developers identified in the White House digital assets report and address vulnerabilities to protect national security”

Amendment #69 — Senator Warren

“…would define financial institutions under anti-money laundering law”

Amendment #70 — Senator Warren

“…would establish tailored anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism responsibilities for certain DeFi front-ends”

Amendment #71 — Senator Warren

“…would establish tailored anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism responsibilities for certain DeFi businesses”

Amendment #72 — Senator Warren

“…would establish tailored anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism responsibilities for certain DeFi businesses”

Amendment #73 — Senator Warren

“…would close the tokenization loopholes”

Amendment #89 — Senator Reed

[Direct attack on Van Loon – 5th Circuit federal court decision – by subjecting smart contracts to sanctions “without regard to whether such contracts operate autonomously, can be modified, or are owned”]

Amendment #92 — Senator Reed

[Expands the application of the BSA by broadening the definition of “financial institution” to include digital asset companies and developers]

Amendment #94 — Senator Reed

[Eliminates BRCA from Clarity Act]

*The amendment text is not yet public as of May 13th at 3:00pm ET. Bracketed language is DEF’s description based on text the DEF team reviewed; language in quotes is the Senators’ original description, which suggests a threat to DeFi. 

The DEF team will continue monitoring the Senate Banking Committee markup process and will share updates throughout the proceedings.

---