2026-01-14 07:30:30

Research institution Galaxy pointed out that if the "Clarity Act" is passed by the U.S. Congress, it will fundamentally change the current financial regulatory landscape. The bill grants the U.S. Department of the Treasury broader powers—most notably, the department can directly freeze trading accounts without a court order.

What does this mean? In comparison to the enactment of the 2001 "Patriot Act," the Clarity Act will be the largest expansion of U.S. financial surveillance powers in the past 24 years. Although the initial goal is to strengthen anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing capabilities, this concentration of power undoubtedly introduces new uncertainties for the cryptocurrency market.

For investors and exchanges, this development is worth paying close attention to.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

13 Likes

Reward
13
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MetaMisery

· 01-17 07:27

No way, freezing accounts without a court order? That's outrageous, it feels like a backdoor is being opened for authority. --- Here we go again, under the guise of anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism, anything can be done. The tricks are so old. --- If the Ministry of Finance could really freeze accounts so casually, I would need to reconsider my asset allocation. --- The largest expansion in 2024... sounds very dangerous. What about the exchanges? --- Wait, if this really passes, is my money safe? --- It's clear that the US is moving towards centralization. The crypto community needs to stay alert.

View OriginalReply0

BoredStaker

· 01-14 08:00

Is it possible to freeze accounts directly without a court order? Isn't this a sign of power being out of control? --- Here comes another expansion of authority in the name of "security," so funny. --- The biggest expansion in 24 years... so our wallets are going to be scrutinized under a microscope. --- Once the clarity bill passes, transaction income will be troublesome, and the uncertainty in the crypto world will increase another level. --- Directly freezing? What about the security of my assets? Who will guarantee that? --- Expanding authority under the banner of anti-terrorism, same old tricks. --- The exchange hasn't even had issues yet, and the financial authorities are already planning how to freeze our accounts. Outrageous. --- Is the era of complete financial surveillance coming... it feels like the freedom of encryption is about to be torn apart. --- If it really passes, can small retail investors' money be protected?

View OriginalReply0

pvt_key_collector

· 01-14 08:00

No way, they’re directly freezing accounts? That’s even harsher than the Patriot Act. It feels like the crypto world is about to shake. --- Basically, the Treasury Department wants absolute authority, bypassing the courts... How corrupt is that? --- Wait, if this really passes, is my money still safe? What about the exchanges? --- Laughing out loud, using anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing as a pretext to concentrate power—one scheme after another. --- This is pushing people towards DEXs, right? Centralized exchanges are probably going to be phased out. --- Clarity Act? It feels even more outrageous than the previous one. The Treasury Department has become a super police force. --- I just want to know, if this passes, what are you all planning to do with your holdings? --- Another expansion of power under the guise of "security," and then what? Power will never be taken back.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCrybaby

· 01-14 07:59

Here it is, the same as the original text in Chinese, since the instruction is to translate to en-US and the text is already in Chinese: 又来了，美国人这套把戏...不经法院直接冻结？说白了就是想对crypto下手呗 --- clarity法案通过的话，交易所怎么活...这下真得囤冷钱包了 --- 天哪，无需法院命令就能冻结账户，听起来跟独裁没区别啊 --- 又是反洗钱的借口，结果还不是方便他们随意控制资金流向 --- 24年来最大权力扩张？我看是最大的噩梦扩张...持币不动可能都要被查 --- 交易所得提前跑，这要真过了就完蛋 --- 所以说永远别把币放在交易所，话糙理不糙

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainBouncer

· 01-14 07:56

No way, freezing without a court order? Isn't this just the American version of financial strangulation? --- Another "for safety" excuse. Once power is given, it can't be taken back. --- Clarity Act? I see it as a "disaster" of clarity. --- Exchanges should start considering going overseas. This time, it's really getting hard to hold on. --- Laughing to death, expanding authority under the guise of anti-terrorism, and in the end, the unlucky ones are still us retail investors. --- The Ministry of Finance can do whatever it wants, right? What about the safety of my assets? --- If this really passes, the crypto market will drop again... Are you ready to buy the dip, everyone? --- The biggest expansion of authority in 24 years. Sounds good, but it's actually about wanting full control over finance. --- Oh my God, no court order needed. What's the difference from dictatorship? --- Quickly check which chain your coins are on, and migrate if necessary.

View OriginalReply0

RadioShackKnight

· 01-14 07:42

Wow, no court order needed to freeze directly? Isn't this just the US version of bank account freezing? The crypto world is about to be watched to death. --- Here comes the same old "anti-money laundering" excuse... The tricks of American power expansion are just a few. --- Once the Clarity Act passes, will exchanges still survive? --- The biggest expansion in 24 years... I'm overwhelmed. On-chain transactions will have to be more low-key now. --- Wait, does this have anything to do with the wallet freezing incidents last year? Why does it feel like power is becoming more centralized? --- Is it true that they can freeze without a court? Are the coins in my wallet still safe? --- Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing... Bullshit, they just want to control cryptocurrencies, claiming it so grandly. --- Galaxy people just know how to issue warnings. When will the bill actually be vetoed?

View OriginalReply0