Tether Blacklists 7,268 Wallets vs. Circle’s 372

AMLBot data shows USDT issuer Tether’s freezes were roughly 30 times larger than USDC by value and address count.

A new on-chain study published by the AMLBot team shows that Tether has frozen more than $3.29 billion in USDT across the Ethereum and Tron blockchains between 2023 and 2025, blacklisting 7,268 addresses in the process.

The findings highlighted a sharp contrast with Circle’s USDC, which froze $109 million across just 372 addresses during the same period, pointing to two very different enforcement philosophies shaping the stablecoin market.

Two Distinct Paths for Stablecoin Policing

AMLBot’s data, shared this month alongside an updated Dune dashboard, painted a clear picture of scale. USDT freezes outpaced USDC by roughly 30 times in both address count and value. Much of that difference came from Tron, where there’s $1.75 billion in USDT sitting in blacklisted wallets, reflecting the network’s heavy use in Asia, peer-to-peer markets, and cross-border settlements.

Tether’s model centers on frequent coordination with authorities. The issuer works with more than 275 law enforcement agencies across 59 jurisdictions and can restrict wallets not only after court orders, but also following notifications tied to hacks or ongoing probes.

In July 2024 alone, USDT freezes topped $130 million, including $29.6 million on Tron, linked to Cambodia’s sanctioned Huione Group. Social media reactions at the time were mixed, with some users praising faster victim recovery while others warned about the reach of centralized issuers.

A distinctive feature of USDT is its burn-and-reissue process. After an investigation, frozen tokens can be destroyed and replaced with clean ones sent back to victims or authorities. AMLBot’s report noted notable burn activity in late 2025, with single-month totals above $25 million.

Still, the same system has drawn criticism. In April 2025, a Texas-based firm sued Tether after $44.7 million was frozen at the request of Bulgarian police, arguing proper international procedures were not followed.

You may also like:

Circle’s approach stands in contrast, with USDC freezes often following explicit legal or regulatory triggers such as court orders or sanctions listings. On-chain data shows fewer events that arrive in batches rather than a steady flow. Once an address is blocked, funds remain locked until legal clearance is granted, with no burn-and-reissue option.

Why the Divide Matters for Stablecoin Adoption

The timing of this report is notable as Circle pushes deeper into regulated markets. Earlier in the month, the firm announced a wide-ranging partnership with Bybit to make USDC a default stablecoin across the exchange’s trading, payments, and savings products. The strategy leans heavily on predictability and compliance, traits institutions often favor.

At the same time, recent incidents underscore the value of rapid intervention. After a trader lost nearly $50 million in USDT to an address-poisoning scam a few days ago, former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao renewed calls for wallet-level protections and shared blacklists. Episodes like this explain why some users view Tether’s hands-on posture as a practical defense, even as privacy concerns persist.

The data shows that stablecoin enforcement is no longer a niche topic, given that these tokens are moving further into everyday finance, meaning that the balance between user protection, legal certainty, and centralized control will remain one of the industry’s most contested questions heading into the new year.