"Two Years Freeze of $3.29 Billion! #USDT vs #USDC : Who is the Most Ruthless Stablecoin Enforcement?"🔥
Stablecoins are moving towards full compliance, but there is a reality that more and more people are beginning to face — freezing. A recent #稳定币 enforcement report directly compares the freezing actions of USDT and USDC, with quite a harsh outcome. 1. Two-year freeze data comparison: not on the same scale 2023–2025 two-year data: 🔴 USDT (Tether) Frozen addresses: 7,268 Frozen amount: $3.29 billion Over 50% of addresses are from TRON 🔵 USDC Frozen addresses: 372 Frozen amount: about $110 million Simple calculations👇 Number of addresses: nearly 20 times difference Frozen amount: about 32 times difference This gap can no longer be explained by "different user bases." 2. The real dividing line: compliance and enforcement strategies The core issue is only one: 👉 The two issuers are taking completely different enforcement routes. 1️⃣ USDT: proactive enforcement (tough stance) Tether’s strategy can be summarized in one sentence: Better to freeze more than leave hidden risks. Collaborates with over 275 global enforcement agencies Proactively responds to freeze requests Suspends suspicious addresses directly Wide coverage, quick actions, heavy enforcement Characteristics: Freeze more Freeze tougher Freeze earlier 😐 For users, safety and uncertainty coexist. 2️⃣ USDC: passive compliance (restrained stance) USDC’s attitude is noticeably more cautious: Only responds to court orders / clear regulatory requirements Does not proactively expand freezing scope Freeze presentation: Fewer addresses Concentrated amounts High trigger thresholds 🫡 Summarized as: Unnecessary, do not freeze. 3. After freezing, can the money be recovered? This is the most concern for everyone. USDT: relatively proactive attitude Supports burn & reissue Willing to assist enforcement under compliance conditions In theory, leaving a way out USDC: more rigid path Does not support burn & reissue for now Limited operational space after freezing Conservative process, little flexibility 4. Real-world perspective: more freezing ≠ easier unfreezing Based on our team’s practical experience over the past two years: USDT Many freeze cases Large amounts Many inquiries about unfreezing USDC Few freezes Only 2 cases in two years Amounts are not large But one fact must be clarified: Unfreezing USDT is really very difficult. 5. Why is the success rate of unfreezing low? The reasons are very practical Mainly three points: 1️⃣ Strict identity verification requirements Clear personal / corporate identity Verifiable and traceable 2️⃣ High threshold for “good faith acquisition” Complete transaction trail Reasonable transaction logic Able to explain the source and use of funds 3️⃣ Lack of cooperation from involved parties Reluctant to provide identity information Cannot produce transaction evidence Or transactions themselves have compliance flaws Many cases are not impossible to resolve, But simply cannot be advanced. 6. Typical case: Taiwan police USDT freeze incident Last year, Taiwan police froze a large number of USDT addresses. But the final result was: Lack of identity information Insufficient transaction evidence Very high enforcement standards 👉 Difficult to advance unfreezing, almost no successful cases. 7. But this is not a “dead end” It’s important to emphasize: As long as you meet 👇 Clear identity Authentic and legal transactions Willing to cooperate fully with enforcement agencies 👉 There are successful unfreezing cases of USDT And real precedents have already been set. Not guaranteed, but not zero probability. 8. Final conclusion: the future of stablecoins is already written on the wall It can be stated very clearly: Stablecoins are moving towards strict regulation and compliance Issuers and enforcement agencies will only work more closely The space for using stablecoins to “push boundaries”: Is rapidly disappearing Freezing could happen at any time But conversely: 👉 If you are a compliant user who has been mistakenly affected, and you have complete evidence Be sure to seek your rights through legal channels, Don’t give up at the start. Stablecoins are no longer “grey tools,” They are becoming part of the financial system.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
"Two Years Freeze of $3.29 Billion! #USDT vs #USDC : Who is the Most Ruthless Stablecoin Enforcement?"🔥
Stablecoins are moving towards full compliance, but there is a reality that more and more people are beginning to face — freezing.
A recent #稳定币 enforcement report directly compares the freezing actions of USDT and USDC, with quite a harsh outcome.
1. Two-year freeze data comparison: not on the same scale
2023–2025 two-year data:
🔴 USDT (Tether)
Frozen addresses: 7,268
Frozen amount: $3.29 billion
Over 50% of addresses are from TRON
🔵 USDC
Frozen addresses: 372
Frozen amount: about $110 million
Simple calculations👇
Number of addresses: nearly 20 times difference
Frozen amount: about 32 times difference
This gap can no longer be explained by "different user bases."
2. The real dividing line: compliance and enforcement strategies
The core issue is only one:
👉 The two issuers are taking completely different enforcement routes.
1️⃣ USDT: proactive enforcement (tough stance)
Tether’s strategy can be summarized in one sentence:
Better to freeze more than leave hidden risks.
Collaborates with over 275 global enforcement agencies
Proactively responds to freeze requests
Suspends suspicious addresses directly
Wide coverage, quick actions, heavy enforcement
Characteristics:
Freeze more
Freeze tougher
Freeze earlier
😐 For users, safety and uncertainty coexist.
2️⃣ USDC: passive compliance (restrained stance)
USDC’s attitude is noticeably more cautious:
Only responds to court orders / clear regulatory requirements
Does not proactively expand freezing scope
Freeze presentation:
Fewer addresses
Concentrated amounts
High trigger thresholds
🫡 Summarized as:
Unnecessary, do not freeze.
3. After freezing, can the money be recovered?
This is the most concern for everyone.
USDT: relatively proactive attitude
Supports burn & reissue
Willing to assist enforcement under compliance conditions
In theory, leaving a way out
USDC: more rigid path
Does not support burn & reissue for now
Limited operational space after freezing
Conservative process, little flexibility
4. Real-world perspective: more freezing ≠ easier unfreezing
Based on our team’s practical experience over the past two years:
USDT
Many freeze cases
Large amounts
Many inquiries about unfreezing
USDC
Few freezes
Only 2 cases in two years
Amounts are not large
But one fact must be clarified:
Unfreezing USDT is really very difficult.
5. Why is the success rate of unfreezing low? The reasons are very practical
Mainly three points:
1️⃣ Strict identity verification requirements
Clear personal / corporate identity
Verifiable and traceable
2️⃣ High threshold for “good faith acquisition”
Complete transaction trail
Reasonable transaction logic
Able to explain the source and use of funds
3️⃣ Lack of cooperation from involved parties
Reluctant to provide identity information
Cannot produce transaction evidence
Or transactions themselves have compliance flaws
Many cases are not impossible to resolve,
But simply cannot be advanced.
6. Typical case: Taiwan police USDT freeze incident
Last year, Taiwan police froze a large number of USDT addresses.
But the final result was:
Lack of identity information
Insufficient transaction evidence
Very high enforcement standards
👉 Difficult to advance unfreezing, almost no successful cases.
7. But this is not a “dead end”
It’s important to emphasize:
As long as you meet 👇
Clear identity
Authentic and legal transactions
Willing to cooperate fully with enforcement agencies
👉 There are successful unfreezing cases of USDT
And real precedents have already been set.
Not guaranteed, but not zero probability.
8. Final conclusion: the future of stablecoins is already written on the wall
It can be stated very clearly:
Stablecoins are moving towards strict regulation and compliance
Issuers and enforcement agencies will only work more closely
The space for using stablecoins to “push boundaries”:
Is rapidly disappearing
Freezing could happen at any time
But conversely:
👉 If you are a compliant user who has been mistakenly affected, and you have complete evidence
Be sure to seek your rights through legal channels,
Don’t give up at the start.
Stablecoins are no longer “grey tools,”
They are becoming part of the financial system.