PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 408.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 20, 2023
Clarity for Payment Stablecoins Act of 2023
This bill establishes a regulatory framework for payment stablecoins (digital assets which an issuer must redeem for a fixed monetary value).
Only permitted issuers are allowed to issue a payment stablecoin for use by U.S. persons. Permitted issuers must be a subsidiary of an insured depository institution, a federal-qualified nonbank payment stablecoin issuer, or a state-qualified payment stablecoin issuer. In general, permitted issuers must be regulated by the appropriate federal regulator, however, state-qualified issuers must be regulated by an appropriate state regulator.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Permitted issuers must maintain reserves backing the stablecoin on a one-to-one basis using assets as outlined by the bill, such as U.S. coins and currency or other assets regulators determine appropriate. Permitted issuers must also publicly disclose their redemption policy, establish redemption procedures, and publish on their website every month the details of the issuer's reserves.
The bill sets forth requirements for (1) the rehypothecation, or reusing, of such reserves; (2) providing custodial or safekeeping services for stablecoins or private keys; and (3) supervisory, examination, and enforcement authority over non-state qualified issuers.
In addition, the bill places a two-year moratorium on new endogenously collateralized stablecoins (i.e., stablecoins that rely on the value of another digital asset created or maintained by the same originator to maintain the fixed price).
Under the bill, permitted payment stablecoins are not considered securities under securities law.
People & committees
Rep. McHenry, Patrick T. [R-NC-10] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 408.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 118-492.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 118-492.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 34 - 16.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: May 27, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4766 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4766 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4766 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4766 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.