The American Senate can quickly approach a final vote on the regulation of stablecoins, which would be a large-scale brand for cryptographic legislation in the congress, but the representative French Hill said that the Senate bill had key differences with a similar effort to the House of Representatives, and that they should be postponed before becoming law.
“The bills are substantially similar,” said Hill, the president of the Chamber’s Financial Services Committee, who has been at the forefront of the Congress negotiations on the Stablecoins for years, during an event in the Atlantic Council on Tuesday. “There are certain differences that are not insurmountable but must be corrected and clarified.”
Hill said that one of the remarkable differences includes the most difficult requirements in the chamber on the “reciprocity” of international regulations on foreign stable -co -emitting issuers which could exchange in the United States – a category most often associated with the main global token, with the attachment
.
“You can be registered in the United States and be an American company under the stable law and you are fully in line, either you are in a court recognized by the United States to have a significantly similar diet and application,” said Hill, noting the version of the Chamber – which has erased its committee with biparisan support, but has not faced a floor vote – seems to be more strict than the Senate.
However, he noted “we do not know the final text of their bill”, which is still being negotiated and fine.
Hill also said that the Chamber’s bill had a “cleaner” route to determine which entities in the state or at the federal level regulate transmitters, according to their commercial models.
And the two chambers continued different approaches to allow non -financial companies to publish stablecoins, which addresses long -standing concerns concerning the traditional separation of banking and commerce and has aroused criticism of democrats who say that they care that the technology giants take control of the financial system. The version of the Chamber indicates that these companies are free to issue stablescoins under regulation by the currency controller office, while the latest version of the Senate said that certain public companies would be prohibited from extinguishing the tokens. Hill said the Senate had work to be done on the clarification of his approach.
He said that he wondered the common account of Stablecoin’s legislation being easier to adopt at Congress than the more complex and large -scale surveillance of all cryptographic markets, citing the success of the Chamber by passing the latter during the last session while clinging to his stable negotiations.
But Hill also recognized the years of paralysis in the Senate on cryptographic issues, claiming that the recent actions of the Chamber on its legislation on stablescoin, the law on national innovation and the establishment of American stable (engineering), are “really important” to advance the effort. He said it was optimistic that the house would also do his share.
“The room is really able to keep President Trump’s promises,” he said, referring to President Donald Trump’s wish to have the bills on stable and the market structure on his office for signatures by recreation of the August Congress.
In American legislation, the Senate and the Chamber must finally accept the identical versions of a bill before being able to be promulgated by the President. If the Senate approves its bill on stables this week, the Chamber has the choice to vote on this same language or to pursue its own. If it passes a different version, the two should be chopped in a compromise version that would need another series of approvals in each room.
In recent weeks, the legislation on stablescoin has authorized the Senate banking committee and the first procedural votes on the prosecution with massive bipartisan support. But it was delayed at a given time by objections of the Democrats that he did not include enough guarantees for illegal activity, and that the bill should prohibit civil servants such as the president from engaging in the company.
Hill recognized, as he had done during the 2025 consensus in Toronto, that Trump’s personal involvement in cryptographic companies – including stablecoins – has made the legislative debate more political than he wishes. “It made things more complicated, because it is a distraction of this basic work,” said Hill.
Read more: Trump’s team “ knows nothing ” on the apparent launch of Trump Wallet “
