Michael Saylor Prefers Regulatory Standards Over the CLARITY Act

• Saylor called the rejection of the law in the Senate a "positive turning point"
• He believes the law imposed too many restrictions on the industry

On Saturday, September 19, 2026, entrepreneur-influencer Michael Saylor published an article on X expressing his stance on the rejection of the CLARITY Act during the past week. In it, he outlines why he prefers the standards set by the SEC, CFTC, and other regulators over the restrictions that the CLARITY Act would have imposed in its latest version.

His company echoed this viewpoint by posting the following tweet:

It is better for the digital asset sector to advance with favorable regulations from the SEC, CFTC, the Treasury Department, and banking regulators than to accept the restrictions of the final CLARITY agreement.

Strategy

What Saylor Says

In his article, Saylor explains that the CLARITY Act, with the modifications it underwent before being discussed last Tuesday, September 15, imposed restrictions on the rewards that providers could offer to their users. "Protecting a bank from a liquidity crisis and protecting it from a stronger competitor are distinct objectives," he emphasizes. Another key point he mentions is that there are already significant opportunities within the framework of existing legislation. The article calls for taking advantage of these without having to accept the additional restrictions of CLARITY.

He then goes on to propose some products that could emerge as the digital asset economy develops. Most of these are, of course, the products offered by his own company, Strategy: BTC as digital capital, STRC as digital credit, and MSTR as digital equity. Additionally, he mentions COIN (the stock of Coinbase) as a "digital exchange," which mixes fiat financial services with cryptocurrency services; and USDC as a regulated digital currency, although his description sounds almost like a CBDC.

To conclude, Saylor points out that it is more important to have a well-established market with plenty of satisfied customers than to pass a law. If the goal of CLARITY was to shield the cryptocurrency industry from a future hostile administration, that can be achieved by allowing it to grow. A future administration will find it difficult to go against an already established industry with many citizens served by it. In the entrepreneur's eyes, the law would have hindered development more than it would have protected the industry. He concludes his article with the following phrase: "The best protection for digital innovation is a public that benefits from it."

The Counterargument

In May of this year, Saylor himself spoke positively about the CLARITY Act, saying it would boost the markets for his stocks and preferred shares. It is possible that his change of opinion is related to the modifications the law underwent before its last vote, although in his article he does not describe how the law would have affected his company, either positively or negatively. Saylor called for using 2027 and 2028 (the remainder of Donald Trump's term) to grow the industry and shield it against a possible governmental shift.

Customer satisfaction must be earned. Products must be useful, easy to understand, and reliable, both in favorable and difficult markets. Transparent conditions, honest information about risks, convenient access, and the freedom to switch providers build trust. Broad implementation turns that trust into lasting support.

Michael Saylor, President of Strategy.

However, it is also important to consider the previous behavior of these actors. Saylor and Strategy have faced harsh scrutiny during 2026 for their lack of transparency, misleading behaviors, and double standards. First, their flagship product STRC hit its lows in June of this year. Then, the company had to betray one of its maxims and sell part of its bitcoin reserves. On top of that, it maintained ambiguous communication about it, saying contradictory things to justify that measure.

This discursive crisis led to Saylor's fall from his messianic pedestal in the Bitcoin ecosystem. During that crisis, some communicators resurfaced a dark chapter from his past: when MicroStrategy rode the dot-com bubble and defrauded the market with false accounting. Several raised alarms, connecting that episode with a potential risk in STRC.

From this perspective, Saylor's message can be interpreted as a defense of free competition. However, Strategy's history also includes questions related to the information provided to its shareholders and the communication of risks associated with its Bitcoin investment strategy.

The price of Strategy's assets has partially recovered from the sharp decline recorded this year, while the company continues to face the challenge of rebuilding the trust of its shareholders and the market.