CLARITY Bill Passage Probability 72%: JPMorgan Interprets Regulatory Positive Catalytic Effect and Market Impact

In the first quarter of 2026, after experiencing a sharp correction at the beginning of the year, the crypto market is searching for new narrative anchors. Among various variables, the visibility of regulatory developments is subtly shifting. In early March, Polymarket data showed that the probability of the CLARITY Act being signed into law in 2026 rose to 72%. Almost simultaneously, JPMorgan analysts explicitly stated in a report that the passage of this bill could serve as a “positive catalyst” for the market in the second half of the year.

This shift in data occurs against the backdrop of lingering doubts about macro liquidity. The rise in probability is not an isolated event but the result of a complex interplay of Washington policy negotiations, industry giant compromises, and prediction market pricing mechanisms. This article will use the 72% key figure as a starting point to objectively outline the event trajectory, analyze the structural logic and potential impacts behind it, and incorporate the latest political developments to reassess the outlook.

Event Overview: Probability Surge and Catalyst Theory

As of March 10, 2026, based on data from the prediction market Polymarket, market participants price in a 72% chance that the CLARITY Act will be signed into law within 2026. This figure has significantly increased from about 50% a week earlier.

In response, traditional financial institutions’ analysis perspectives align. JPMorgan’s analyst team believes that if this legislation—aimed at clarifying digital asset regulation boundaries and token classification—passes by mid-year, it will provide critical upward support for the market in the second half. The core logic is that: the bill will provide regulatory certainty, ending the previous “vague regulation” state that relied on enforcement actions to define rules, thus clearing obstacles for further institutional capital entry.

Polymarket’s probability does not guarantee the bill’s passage but reflects collective pricing based on current information sets (news updates, negotiation progress, political statements). JPMorgan’s view is based on modeling institutional capital flows and macroeconomic conditions.

From Vague Enforcement to Legislative Negotiation

To understand the current 72% probability, it’s essential to review key turning points in the legislative process over the past months.

• Early 2025 – early 2026: Industry fatigue with “enforcement-style regulation” accumulates, and the demand for clear rules becomes more urgent.
• Early February 2026: JPMorgan issues a report linking institutional capital inflows to potential new legislation (like the CLARITY Act), viewing regulatory clarity as key to recovery in 2026.
• Mid to late February 2026: Market optimism surges, influenced by statements from industry leaders like Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong about progress in negotiations, pushing Polymarket’s probability above 80%. Subsequently, disagreements over stablecoin yield issues cause the probability to fall back to around 50%.
• Early March 2026: After an informal negotiation deadline set by the White House, the probability stabilizes and rises again to 72%.
• March 9, 2026: Trump states at a Republican conference in Florida that he will refuse to sign any other laws until Congress approves the “SAVE America Act” (voter ID law). This latest political statement adds new uncertainty to the bill’s prospects.

This timeline clearly illustrates the normalcy of the legislative process: over-optimism, exposure of disagreements, re-pricing after negotiations, and sudden external political influences. The current 72% level reflects the market digesting core conflicts between banking and crypto sectors, as well as recent political dynamics.

Data Analysis: The Deep Numbers Behind the Probability

Numbers are not just sentiment gauges but quantifications of underlying shifts in power structures.

Structurally, the 72% probability reflects cautious optimism. It’s neither as euphoric as mid-February nor as pessimistic as during negotiation breakdowns. This data suggests that despite fundamental conflicts over stablecoin yields, both sides still have room for compromise under political pressure. However, Trump’s latest statement might tie the legislation to the “SAVE America Act,” adding time-based uncertainty.

The Spectrum of Stakeholder Positions

Regarding the CLARITY Act, different stakeholders’ narrative logics vary significantly.

• Mainstream view (JPMorgan and similar institutions): The bill is a structural positive. Its logic is based on “certainty premium.” For large institutions like pension funds and hedge funds, reduced compliance costs and clear legal classification are more attractive than high potential yields. Therefore, passing the bill is seen as a key prerequisite for activating a bullish institutional phase in the second half.
• Industry leaders (Coinbase, Ripple CEO): Optimistic and urgent. Brian Armstrong emphasizes the bill as a “three-win” scenario (industry, banks, consumers) and opposes banning stablecoin yields, arguing it harms consumers. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse even estimates a 90% chance of passage (by late April), emphasizing “don’t let perfect be the enemy of progress”—the industry urgently needs clear rules.
• Core controversy (traditional banking sector): Defensive game. Banking lobbies strongly push to restrict or ban stablecoin yield sharing of underlying assets (like US Treasuries). They see high-yield stablecoins as a direct threat to existing deposit bases, creating a fierce fight over the pricing of financial infrastructure.

Verifying the Narrative’s Authenticity: The Logic Chain Behind the Catalyst

JPMorgan’s “positive catalyst” narrative hinges on a key premise: that the bill can truly end “enforcement-style regulation.” If the final version remains ambiguous on critical clauses or leaves too much interpretive room for regulators, the supposed clarity benefits diminish. Moreover, Trump’s recent statement adds timing uncertainty— even if core clauses are agreed upon, political agendas could delay passage. Therefore, the market may need to reprice the “pass within the year” probability, factoring in more political game elements.

Industry Impact Analysis: If “72%” Becomes Reality

If the CLARITY Act ultimately passes, its impact on the industry will be systemic, not just a short-term price spike.

• Asset side: Secondary market liquidity and legal clarity will fundamentally improve. Token attributes as “securities” or “commodities” will be clarified, with some tokens potentially qualifying under grandfather clauses or specific pathways.
• Institutional side: Barriers for traditional banks entering digital asset custody and trading will be lowered. Institutions like Citigroup and Morgan Stanley, already beginning to deploy, will gain clearer compliance pathways. This not only attracts incremental capital but also deepens market structure.
• Application side: RWA (real-world asset) tokenization will shift from experimental to mainstream. With legal status confirmed, tokenization of real estate, bonds, fund shares will see explosive growth.
• Developers: Immunity clauses for open-source developers will protect technological innovation from being classified as illegal financial activities, maintaining US competitiveness in blockchain R&D.

Multi-Scenario Evolution

Based on current information, three main scenarios and their potential market impacts can be projected:

Scenario 1: Baseline — Bill passes within 2026

• Path: Senate reaches compromise on stablecoin yield issues in Q2 (e.g., specific exemptions), bill is signed into law in Q3. Trump’s “bundling” demands might delay this to later in the year.
• Impact: Market confidence is substantially boosted. Compliance-eligible tokens (e.g., those potentially classified as “non-securities”) lead gains. Institutional custody and RWA sectors benefit from real policy support. The narrative of Bitcoin as “digital gold” and compliant assets resonate. As JPMorgan expects, this becomes a core driver for the second half.

Scenario 2: Delay — Negotiations stall, bill pushed to 2027

• Path: Intractable disagreements over stablecoin yields or “SAVE America Act” bundling delay legislation into 2027.
• Impact: Short-term disappointment, Polymarket probabilities fall sharply. Industry won’t revert to the pre-legislation state; state-level regulation and existing enforcement (e.g., CFTC) continue. Focus shifts back to macro liquidity and Bitcoin halving supply-demand dynamics.

Scenario 3: Partial/Weakened Passage — Bill passes but key clauses diluted

• Path: To expedite passage, key provisions (e.g., bank custody rights, yield restrictions) are significantly watered down, leading to less clarity.
• Impact: Initial market optimism may be misled; legal hurdles remain. Actual compliance remains difficult, and the anticipated structural benefits may be delayed or diminished. Further amendments will be needed for genuine systemic change.

Conclusion

The 72% figure is more than a market prediction—it’s a real-time reflection of the power struggle between crypto and traditional finance in Washington. For market participants, rather than betting solely on the final outcome, it’s crucial to understand the underlying structural logic: this legislative fight is fundamentally about who defines the rules of the future digital financial world and how. Trump’s latest statement reminds us that political agendas can shift timelines at any moment. Regardless of the final result, the pendulum swinging from “vague” to “clear” regulation has begun—an irreversible process. The industry’s next decade may well be shaped within this complex 72% game.