Crypto Lobby Pushes Congress to Pass Staking and Mining Tax Bill

A coalition of major crypto advocacy groups is urging the U.S. Congress to move forward with the Tax Clarity for Mining and Staking Act without amendments, arguing that the bill would finally resolve long-running uncertainty around whether staking and mining rewards are taxed as income when received.

In a letter sent Sunday to House Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith and top Democrat Richard Neal, the Blockchain Association, the Crypto Council for Innovation, and The Digital Chamber said the current version of the legislation offers a “durable compromise” that would improve tax clarity while helping ensure that networks reliant on mining and staking “can be secured by Americans in America.” The groups asked lawmakers to pass the bill “as introduced.”

Key takeaways

• Crypto industry groups are asking House Ways and Means to advance the Tax Clarity for Mining and Staking Act unchanged.
• The bill would let miners and stakers choose whether to recognize taxes on rewards when received or when the assets are sold.
• Democratic Rep. Steven Horsford proposed an amendment to limit deferral of crypto reward taxes to five years, which industry leaders say would undermine the bill.
• The banking industry has criticized the proposal as giving cryptocurrencies an unfair advantage versus other savings and investment vehicles.
• The measure is competing for momentum alongside another crypto tax initiative, the PARITY Act, which directs the IRS to examine possible exemptions for small crypto transactions.

Why the industry wants “tax clarity” on rewards

At the heart of the dispute is how U.S. tax rules treat mining and staking outputs. The coalition argues that the existing tax approach can effectively tax rewards like income at the moment they are received—even when holders have not converted them into cash. In the groups’ view, that setup can create “taxation of phantom income,” potentially leaving taxpayers with a tax bill but insufficient liquidity.

The Tax Clarity for Mining and Staking Act is designed to address that issue by offering miners and stakers a choice in when they recognize taxable income. According to the coalition’s description of the bill, taxpayers could pay taxes either when they receive crypto rewards or when they later sell the assets.

Industry advocates say this structure would recognize income at the point it becomes realizable—while avoiding immediate taxation before a taxpayer has the ability to monetize the holdings.

Committee politics: the five-year deferral fight

The bill was introduced earlier this month, ahead of a legislative hearing connected to House Ways and Means. However, it has not moved beyond the committee stage. One reason: a proposed amendment from Rep. Steven Horsford that would cap how long taxpayers can defer taxes on crypto rewards to five years.

Crypto Council for Innovation CEO Ji Hun Kim publicly criticized that approach. In an X post, Kim said Horsford’s amendment would “break” the bill and raise only “negligible revenue.” He also said there were already “significant concessions” built into the current negotiations.

The coalition’s letter frames any renegotiation of the bill—especially if it changes terms that were designed to resolve the underlying taxation problem—as a risk to the broader bipartisan effort. They warned that reopening the compromise could revive the same uncertainties the legislation seeks to fix and delay progress.

Banking lobby pushback and the “advantage” argument

The dispute is not limited to crypto policy circles. The American Bankers Association raised objections earlier this month, arguing that the legislation would tilt the playing field in crypto’s favor.

In its critique, the ABA described the proposal as a mechanism that would work differently from how dividends are taxed. In the ABA’s example, when dividends are paid, shareholders receive value and then pay tax for that year. By contrast, the ABA said, the Tax Clarity for Mining and Staking Act would treat crypto reward taxation in a way that would amount to clear favoritism toward cryptocurrencies over other asset classes.

Crypto advocates responded to that broader skepticism by urging lawmakers not to alter the bill’s existing framework. Their argument is that the current text already reflects concessions meant to address concerns from multiple sides—so changing the terms could stall consensus.

How this bill fits into the wider U.S. crypto tax debate

Congressional attention on crypto taxation has expanded beyond mining and staking. The industry has also pointed to the PARITY Act, introduced in May, which directs the Internal Revenue Service to study how exemptions could apply to small crypto transactions.

Advocates have argued that frequent compliance for low-value trades can produce an outsized administrative burden. Earlier reporting cited statements from Kraken saying it sent millions of tax forms to the IRS, with a substantial share relating to transactions under certain dollar thresholds—an example used to support calls for narrower exemptions.

Taken together, these proposals reflect two related goals: reducing tax treatment that can force holders to deal with bills before they can liquidate assets, and lowering friction for taxpayers conducting smaller transactions.

What to watch next

With the Tax Clarity for Mining and Staking Act still stuck in House Ways and Means, the next key question is whether committee negotiations will preserve the bill’s core “receive vs. sell” choice for rewards—or whether amendments like Horsford’s five-year cap will reshape the measure enough to break momentum. Investors and builders in crypto’s infrastructure layer will likely be watching whether lawmakers prioritize tax administrability and liquidity concerns over arguments about competitive parity with traditional finance.