Tether blacklists 7,268 wallets vs. Circle’s 372

AMLBot data shows that USDT issuer Tether freezes were about 30 times higher 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 on the Ethereum and Tron blockchains between 2023 and 2025, blacklisting 7,268 addresses in the process.

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

Two different paths to stablecoin surveillance

AMLBot data, shared this month alongside an updated Dune dashboard, showed a clear picture of scale. USDT freezes surpassed USDC by approximately 30 times in both number and value of addresses. Much of that difference came from Tron, where there is $1.75 billion worth of USDT in blacklisted wallets, reflecting the network’s heavy use in Asia, peer-to-peer markets and cross-border deals.

Tether’s model focuses on frequent coordination with authorities. The issuer works with more than 275 law enforcement agencies in 59 jurisdictions and can restrict wallets not only after court orders, but also after notifications related to attacks or ongoing investigations.

In July 2024 alone, USDT freezes exceeded $130 million, including $29.6 million in Tron, linked to Cambodia’s sanctioned Huione Group. Reactions on social media at the time were mixed, with some users praising a faster recovery for victims, while others warned about the reach of centralized broadcasters.

A distinctive feature of USDT is its recording and reissuance process. After an investigation, frozen tokens can be destroyed and replaced with clean ones that are sent to victims or authorities. The AMLBot report noted notable flaring activity in late 2025, with monthly totals exceeding $25 million.

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

You may also be interested in:

Circle’s approach contrasts: USDC freezes often follow explicit legal or regulatory triggers, such as court orders or sanctions lists. On-chain data shows fewer events arriving in batches rather than a constant stream. Once an address is locked, funds remain locked until legal authorization is granted, with no option to burn and reissue.

Why splitting is important for stablecoin adoption

The timing of this report is notable as Circle moves deeper into regulated markets. Earlier this month, the company announced a wide-ranging partnership with Bybit to make USDC a default stablecoin across all of the exchange’s trading, payments, and savings products. The strategy relies heavily on predictability and compliance, traits that 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 see Tether’s practical stance as a practical defense, even as privacy concerns persist.

The data shows that the application of stablecoins is no longer a niche topic, as these tokens are increasingly incorporated into everyday finances, meaning that the balance between user protection, legal certainty and centralized control will remain one of the most controversial issues in the industry heading into the new year.