Trump vs Powell, Solving the Debt Crisis, The $10T AGI Prize, GENIUS Act Becomes Law

Public records show that the GENIUS Act (a U.S. stablecoin regulation bill) passed the House on July 17, 2025, and was signed into law by President Donald Trump on July 18, 2025, according to the bill’s legislative history and multiple news outlets. (en.wikipedia.org) The White House published an official fact sheet dated July 18, 2025, explicitly stating that President Trump signed the GENIUS Act into law that day. (whitehouse.gov) Since the podcast’s public release date is July 19, 2025, the signing and enactment indeed occurred before the episode was released.

Sacks’s prediction that the bill would go to the president’s desk "tomorrow," be signed in a bill‑signing ceremony, and become law before the pod was released is therefore borne out by the subsequent timeline.

Congressional and news records show that the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (the CLARITY Act, H.R. 3633) did not pass the Senate or reach President Trump’s desk by the end of September 2025, nor was it signed into law in October 2025.

Key facts:

• The CLARITY Act passed the House on July 17, 2025, by a 294–134 vote. It was then sent to the Senate and on September 18, 2025 was “received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs,” where it remains. Congress.gov lists its latest action as that September 18 referral, and its status is still only “Passed House,” not “Passed Senate,” “To President,” or “Became Law.” (congress.gov)
• A Congressional Research Service brief on the CLARITY Act, revised September 30, 2025, still describes it as pending legislation and does not indicate Senate passage or enactment. (legistorm.com)
• Senate sources through October 2025 describe the crypto market-structure bill (based on or related to the CLARITY framework) as being in draft/negotiation, with significant partisan disputes and no completed committee or floor vote. For example, coverage from early and late October notes that the market-structure bill “remains in the discussion phase in the Senate” and is stalled amid gridlock, clearly implying it has not yet passed. (axios.com)
• By contrast, the GENIUS Act (the stablecoin bill) did complete the process: it passed both chambers and was signed by President Trump on July 18, 2025, becoming the first major federal crypto law. This is consistently documented in legislative records and press reports, underscoring that if the CLARITY Act had been similarly enacted, it would appear in the same way—which it does not. (en.wikipedia.org)

David Sacks’ prediction, normalized as: “Assuming the process proceeds without major disruption, the CLARITY Act will pass the Senate and reach President Trump’s desk by the end of September 2025, enabling a signing into law around October 2025,” is therefore incorrect. The specified milestones (Senate passage by end of September and presidential signing in October) did not occur within that timeframe or by November 30, 2025, despite ongoing work on related Senate market-structure legislation.

The prediction specifies a three‑year window starting from the GENIUS Act’s enactment. The podcast episode is dated 19 July 2025, and the title claims the GENIUS Act Becomes Law on or around that time. Three years from mid‑2025 ends in mid‑2028, which is well after the current date of 30 November 2025 (i.e., only a few months have elapsed).

Because the deadline for the prediction (sometime in 2028) has not yet passed, we cannot determine whether:

1. The world’s largest stablecoin issuer in mid‑2025 (commonly understood to be Tether/USDT, operated by Tether Holdings Limited, an offshore entity),
2. Will in fact establish an onshore, U.S.‑regulated structure and
3. Comply with U.S. regulatory requirements within three years of the GENIUS Act’s enactment.

There is still substantial time remaining for either outcome, so the prediction cannot be judged as right or wrong yet.

The GENIUS Act was signed into law on July 18, 2025 and establishes a federal framework for “payment stablecoin” issuers, so its actual requirements are now clear.(en.wikipedia.org) Comparing those to Sacks’s prediction:

1. “All the stablecoin companies will have to operate in the United States” – The Act does not require every stablecoin issuer to be U.S.-based. It explicitly forbids foreign issuers from being licensed as U.S. permitted payment stablecoin issuers, but still allows U.S. digital asset service providers to offer some foreign-issued payment stablecoins if the foreign issuer is under a “comparable” non‑U.S. regime, registers for monitoring by the OCC, and holds sufficient reserves in the U.S. for U.S. customers, among other conditions.(debevoise.com) Foreign issuers can continue operating abroad and, if they meet these conditions, can still access the U.S. market. So it is incorrect to say that all stablecoin companies must operate in the U.S.; the law creates a U.S.-jurisdiction gate for access to the U.S. market, not a universal U.S.-location requirement.

2. “They’ll be subjected to quarterly audits” – The statute and regulatory analyses describe monthly reserve reporting with independent attestations and annual audited financial statements for large issuers, not quarterly audits. Issuers must publish a monthly reserve report (outstanding coins and reserve composition), with prior months’ reports audited by a registered public accounting firm, and issuers over certain size thresholds must produce annually audited GAAP financials.(debevoise.com) Commentators even note that the Act rejects traditional quarterly cadences in favor of monthly oversight for stablecoins.(theregreview.org) So the “quarterly audits” detail is specifically wrong.

3. “Every stablecoin … fully reserved or backed up by a dollar in a U.S. bank account” – The Act requires at least 1:1 reserves in specified high‑quality, U.S.‑dollar‑denominated liquid assets (U.S. currency and central bank reserves, FDIC‑insured bank deposits, short‑term U.S. Treasuries, Treasury repos, certain government money market funds, and tokenized versions of these).(debevoise.com) That is broader than “a dollar in a U.S. bank account” (it explicitly includes short‑term Treasuries, repos, and government MMFs), though directionally similar. More importantly, these rules apply to permitted U.S. payment stablecoins and qualifying foreign payment stablecoins offered in the U.S., not to every stablecoin globally or to all types of crypto tokens (algorithmic or non‑payment stablecoins are outside this core regime).(debevoise.com) So we will not literally “know that every stablecoin that’s been issued is fully reserved”; we will only have that assurance—via required disclosures and attestations—for the regulated subset within the Act’s perimeter.

4. Timing (“once the Act is in force and implemented”) – The law sets deferred and phased effective dates: it becomes effective the earlier of 18 months after enactment or 120 days after implementing regulations, and some prohibitions (e.g., on unlicensed U.S. issuers via intermediaries) don’t fully bite until years later.(debevoise.com) But regardless of that timing, the content of the eventual regime is already fixed in the statute and does not match Sacks’s description on the key points above.

Because two central elements of the prediction—universal U.S. operation for all stablecoin companies and a quarterly audit requirement—conflict with the actual text and structure of the GENIUS Act, and the claim about “every stablecoin” being backed by a dollar in a U.S. bank account overstates the law’s scope and narrows its allowed reserve types, the prediction is best classified as wrong, not merely incomplete or too early to judge.

As of November 30, 2025, there has not yet been trillions of dollars of additional cumulative demand for U.S. Treasuries driven by dollar‑backed stablecoins under the GENIUS Act, but the prediction was explicitly framed as occurring “over the coming years” after enactment, so it is too early to judge it right or wrong.

Key facts:

• The GENIUS Act was passed by Congress and signed into law in mid‑2025 (Senate passage on June 17, 2025; reporting on it being signed into law on July 18, 2025). (reuters.com)
• Following enactment, one analysis estimates that between July and November 2025, stablecoin issuers bought about $44 billion in Treasury bills to comply with the new 100%‑backing requirements, raising the stablecoin market cap from about $260 billion to roughly $304 billion. (cryptowakeup.com) That’s tens of billions, not trillions, of incremental demand so far.
• Broadly, dollar‑backed stablecoins already hold on the order of $150–200+ billion in Treasuries as reserves, given total stablecoin market caps in the low‑hundreds of billions and reserve ratios heavily weighted to T‑bills. (coinlive.com) This is material but still far below “trillions.”
• However, official and industry projections after GENIUS was enacted envision exactly the kind of outcome Sacks referenced: for example, U.S. Treasury and TBAC analyses, as well as bank research (Standard Chartered, Citi, etc.), project stablecoin market caps could reach $1–3.7 trillion+ by 2028–2030, implying $1–2+ trillion of additional demand for short‑term U.S. government securities if current reserve structures persist. (mdpi.com) Senior officials like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have publicly cited similar multi‑trillion‑dollar potential demand. (mdpi.com)

Putting this together:

• The descriptive part of Sacks’s statement — that studies project the GENIUS Act–style stablecoin regime could generate trillions in new Treasury demand — is supported by multiple government and bank analyses.
• The forecasted outcome itself (actual trillions of extra demand materializing) is meant to unfold over several years (often modeled out to 2028–2030). Only a few months of post‑enactment data are available, and the realized additional demand so far is in the tens of billions, while the relevant horizon is multi‑year.

Because we are still near the beginning of that horizon and the projected magnitudes have not yet had time to either materialize or clearly fail, the correct assessment today is “inconclusive (too early)”, not definitively right or wrong.

The prediction explicitly refers to "the coming years", implying a multi‑year horizon. As of now (30 Nov 2025), only a bit over four months have passed since the 19 Jul 2025 podcast, so the full time window has clearly not elapsed.

Empirically, dollar‑based stablecoins are seeing rapid global growth:

• Global stablecoin market cap has passed about $300B with daily average transaction volumes in the trillions, and they are expanding from trading into payments, savings, and business uses worldwide. (business-standard.com)
• Reports estimate stablecoins are actively used in 50+ countries, especially for remittances, ecommerce, and as a “digital dollar” in high‑inflation economies like Nigeria and Argentina. (coinlaw.io)
• Studies show hundreds of millions of wallet addresses and trillions of dollars of on‑chain volume, with significant shares of payments activity (P2P, B2B, and card‑based) now moving over stablecoins in multiple regions. (crypto.news)

At the same time, major regulators still describe real‑economy, day‑to‑day payment use as limited in some developed markets. For example, the European Central Bank notes that stablecoins’ use in the real economy is still limited in Europe, even while the sector is large and systemically relevant. (cincodias.elpais.com) That makes it hard to say they are already “commonly used for transactions” across many countries in the everyday sense implied by the normalized prediction.

Given:

1. The prediction’s multi‑year timeframe has not yet run its course, and
2. Current data show strong momentum but not yet clear, mainstream everyday usage “all over the world,”

it’s too early to judge definitively whether the prediction will ultimately be right or wrong.

It’s too early to determine whether this multi‑year prediction has come true.

1. The stated horizon (“next several years”) hasn’t elapsed.
The prediction was made on 19 July 2025 and explicitly framed as playing out over the next several years. Evaluating it by 30 November 2025—roughly four and a half months later—does not satisfy that timeframe, so the outcome cannot yet be judged.

2. Directionally, evidence supports growing stablecoin‑driven dollarization.
Recent analyses show rapid growth of dollar‑pegged stablecoins used as de facto digital dollars in high‑inflation or capital‑controlled economies such as Argentina, Turkey, Nigeria, and others. In these places, people use USDT/USDC for savings, payments, remittances, and invoicing, often explicitly to escape weak local currencies.(followin.io) Stablecoin transaction volumes globally have surged into the tens of trillions of dollars annually, and total stablecoin supply exceeds $200 billion, with usage heavily concentrated in emerging markets.(coindesk.com) This supports the trend sacks described: bottom‑up, dollar‑stablecoin usage in developing countries.

3. But current data do not yet show that a “large share” of all economic transactions has shifted.
Even optimistic reports emphasize that stablecoins, while important in certain niches (crypto trading, cross‑border payments, savings, some retail payments), still represent only a small fraction of total money supply and overall transaction volume in these economies. One analysis notes that despite fast growth, stablecoins are still only a few‑tenths of a percent of global money supply.(blog.wewire.com) Most day‑to‑day commerce in these countries still runs through cash and traditional banking systems, so the claim that a large share of all economic transactions has shifted to dollar stablecoins is not yet demonstrably true or false.

Because (a) the forecast’s multi‑year window has barely begun and (b) current evidence shows strong growth but not yet the clear, economy‑wide dominance implied by “a large portion of these economies,” the only defensible judgment at this point is inconclusive (too early).

The prediction is framed as a multi‑year structural claim (“over the coming years” community banks will not be put out of business or broadly wiped out by stablecoins). As of Nov. 30, 2025, only a little over four months have elapsed since the July 19, 2025 episode, so the intended time horizon has clearly not played out.

What we can see so far:

• Community banks remain a major part of the U.S. system and are still described in 2025 policy discussions as providing the majority of small‑business and agricultural lending, i.e., they have not been broadly wiped out or rendered insignificant in the short term.​(icba.org)
• An empirical study by Charles River Associates (commissioned by Coinbase) using 2019–2025 data finds no material impact of USDC stablecoin adoption on community‑bank deposits under current and near‑term adoption levels, with even aggressive scenarios implying only single‑digit percentage impacts on deposits.​(crai.com)
• Coinbase and other industry analyses likewise argue that, at current and projected scales, stablecoins are unlikely to meaningfully erode community‑bank funding, though they advocate for partnerships and guardrails.​(cointelegraph.com)

At the same time, regulators and policy groups continue to warn that future large‑scale, yield‑bearing or non‑bank stablecoins could trigger major deposit outflows and consolidation that would fall hardest on community banks, underscoring that the long‑run outcome is unresolved.​(icba.org)

Because the claim is explicitly about what will happen over the coming years and the system is still in the early phase of adaptation to the GENIUS Act and expanding stablecoin use, there has not yet been enough time to judge whether community banks will ultimately avoid being substantially displaced. Early evidence is consistent with the prediction, but it does not yet settle the long‑term question. Hence the result is inconclusive (too early to tell).

Evidence shows that by well before October 2025 a follow‑on CLARITY market‑structure bill for non‑stablecoin digital assets had in fact been drafted and significantly advanced in the U.S. Congress:

• After the GENIUS Act established a federal framework for payment stablecoins and was signed into law on July 18, 2025, news coverage described it as the first major stablecoin law and noted that the administration and congressional leaders were already pointing to a broader crypto market‑structure bill as the next step. 【0news13】【0search15】
• The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 ("CLARITY Act of 2025", H.R. 3633) was introduced on May 29, 2025. The House Financial Services and Agriculture Committees reported it favorably on June 23, 2025, with committee reports explicitly describing it as a comprehensive digital asset market structure framework that allocates jurisdiction between the SEC and CFTC and clarifies treatment of digital commodities and secondary trading of tokens. 【0search1】
• The bill passed the U.S. House on July 17, 2025 (294–134) and on September 18, 2025 was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Banking Committee, with its official status shown as "Passed House"—all well before October 2025. 【2view0】
• Associated press coverage of the July 17 House votes explicitly distinguishes three separate crypto bills: a bipartisan stablecoin regulation bill, a market structure bill defining which digital assets are commodities or securities, and a CBDC‑ban bill, with the market‑structure bill heading to the Senate. 【0news14】 This matches the predicted idea of a follow‑on non‑stablecoin market‑structure measure.
• On July 23, 2025, the Senate Banking Committee chair announced an initial discussion draft of broader digital‑asset market‑structure legislation, explicitly framed as building on both the GENIUS Act and the House‑passed CLARITY Act—indicating active intent to advance such a framework in the Senate. 【0search2】

By October 2025, therefore, a CLARITY‑branded market‑structure bill for non‑stablecoin digital assets had been drafted, moved through House committees, passed the House, and been taken up in the Senate, with leadership clearly signaling an aim to pass it. That satisfies the normalized prediction that a follow‑on “Clarity” market‑structure bill for non‑stablecoin tokens would be drafted, advanced, and positioned for passage by October 2025, even though it had not yet become law by that date.