Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

The world’s largest stablecoin issuer pays roughly $2.9 billion a year in fees to blockchains it does not control. Its answer was to back two competing chains at once: Plasma, the $373 million DeFi-flavored bet, and Stable, the enterprise rail where USDT is the gas. One issuer, two armies, one enemy named Tron, and a strategy that makes sense only when you see whose problem it solves.

Summary

Tether’s ecosystem has seeded two purpose-built USDT chains that compete directly with each other: Plasma, live since September with a $373 million token sale, a paymaster model, and roughly $551 million in DeFi TVL, and Stable, live since December with $2 billion in pre-deposits, USDT-as-gas, and an enterprise focus. The motive is a number: analyses put Tether’s annual network-fee bill near $2.9 billion, split largely between Ethereum and Tron, value that leaks to base layers the issuer does not control while its own revenue runs near $5 billion. The two chains embody opposite design philosophies, a subsidized general-purpose DeFi economy with a native token doing traditional work, versus a stripped payments rail where the dollar itself is the fuel, and opposite go-to-market strategies. The real target is not each other but Tron, which still carries roughly 45% of all USDT and earns the fees on the world’s largest remittance flows, a moat neither challenger has meaningfully dented. Funding both sides is not indecision; it is a portfolio: the issuer wins if either chain repatriates the fee leak, wins bigger if both segment the market, and loses only to the status quo it is paying $2.9 billion a year to escape. Companies do not usually finance both armies in a war, but then no company has ever been positioned quite like Tether. The issuer of USDT sits atop the most profitable simple business in finance, collecting Treasury yield on the reserves behind roughly $150 billion of circulating dollars, and it watches, every day, a substantial slice of its ecosystem’s economics leak sideways: the fees users pay to move USDT accrue not to Tether but to the blockchains USDT lives on, a bill that research houses have tallied near $2.9 billion a year, flowing mostly to Ethereum validators and, above all, to Tron, the chain that quietly became the developing world’s dollar-remittance backbone.

Tether’s response, characteristically, was not one bet but two. Plasma, backed by Tether-adjacent capital and Founders Fund, raised $373 million in an oversubscribed sale and launched in September as a general-purpose stablecoin chain with a native token, a paymaster that makes USDT transfers free, and a DeFi ecosystem that onboarded Aave, Ethena, and Euler on day one. Stable, backed by Bitfinex with Tether’s chief executive advising, drew $2 billion in pre-deposits and launched in December as something sparer: a chain where USDT itself is the gas, transfers are free by protocol rule, and the pitch is enterprise blockspace rather than yield farming.

Bitfinex-backed layer 1 Stable releases tokenomics, mainnet to go live on Dec. 8

Stable shares tokenomics details ahead of its Dec. 8 mainnet launch, with a total supply of 100B tokens distributed among ecosystem, team, investors and advisors.

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) December 3, 2025 Two chains, one family, the same target market, and a rivalry the ecosystem politely declines to name. This piece names it, maps the two designs honestly, and answers the question the arrangement raises: why an issuer would fund its own chain war, and what winning even means when you own both sides.

The fee leak: the war’s actual cause Start with the number that explains everything, because without it the two-chain strategy looks like a waste and with it the strategy looks obvious.

USDT’s success created a strange corporate geometry: the asset is Tether’s, the activity is enormous, and the toll booths belong to other people. Every USDT transfer on Ethereum pays gas to Ethereum validators; every transfer on Tron, where nearly half of all USDT lives and where the remittance corridors of Asia, Africa, and Latin America actually run, pays energy and bandwidth costs into Tron’s economy.

Aggregated, analyses of Tether’s ecosystem have put the annual network-fee spend associated with USDT movement at roughly $2.9 billion, against issuer revenues that industry estimates placed near $4.9 billion in the same period, meaning the base layers underneath USDT capture value at a scale approaching the issuer’s own take.

Delphi Digital’s framing of the problem is the cleanest: as issuance spread across chains, the infrastructure supporting USDT ended up largely outside Tether’s control, and the economic value generated by usage is disproportionately captured by the rails, especially Ethereum and Tron.

For most companies this would be an irritation. For a stablecoin issuer, it is a strategic vulnerability with three faces. Economically, it is margin leaking to landlords. Competitively, it funds a chain, Tron, whose operator is an independent actor with his own token, his own politics, and his own regulatory exposures, none of which Tether chooses. And architecturally, it means the user experience of the world’s most used digital dollar, fees, congestion, gas-token requirements, is set by networks optimizing for other things.

The purpose-built USDT chain is the answer to all three at once: repatriate the fees, own the rail, and design the experience around the dollar. The only question was which design, and Tether’s ecosystem answered: both.

Two chains, two philosophies The rivals are best understood as opposite answers to one question: how much chain does a stablecoin need?

Plasma’s answer is: a whole one. It is a full EVM Layer 1 with its own token, XPL, doing the traditional native-token jobs, validator staking, settlement asset, and value accrual through the chain’s growth, while a paymaster contract absorbs gas costs so that simple USDT transfers cost users nothing. The design keeps the familiar crypto economy intact: XPL had a $373 million public sale seven times oversubscribed, the chain launched with more than a hundred DeFi integrations, TVL has built to roughly $551 million, sub-second PlasmaBFT finality serves trading as well as payments, Bitcoin anchoring adds a security narrative, and a confidential-transfers module courts payroll and B2B flows.

https://x.com/cryptodotnews/status/1971621952008999090

Plasma is, in short, a general-purpose chain that subsidizes its stablecoin lane, betting that free USDT transfers pull in users whose other activity, lending, trading, yield, pays the bills and accrues to the token. The paymaster’s economics depend on exactly the patron logic this publication’s gasless-transfers guide dissects: most zero-fee chains in history died when the subsidy ran out, and Plasma’s differentiating claim is that its subsidy is underwritten by an ecosystem with a direct commercial interest in USDT ubiquity.

Stable’s answer is: as little chain as possible. No paymaster indirection, no separate gas asset at all: USDT0, the omnichain dollar, is the fee token; simple transfers are exempt by protocol rule, and the native STABLE token is confined to staking and governance, deliberately invisible to users, the architecture this publication’s companion guides map in detail.

Where Plasma courted DeFi, Stable ships enterprise blockspace, dedicated capacity for institutional payment flows, and its traction metric was not TVL but the $2 billion in pre-deposits that arrived before mainnet. The design concedes the DeFi economy to others and optimizes one thing: dollar movement at payments-grade predictability, on the bet that remittance processors, merchants, and treasuries choose rails the way they choose clearing banks: for boredom, not composability.

The philosophies produce different vulnerabilities, and honesty requires both. Plasma’s risk is dilution of purpose: a general-purpose chain competing for DeFi against Ethereum, Solana, and every L2, where free USDT transfers are a loss leader for an economy that may never outgrow its subsidy, and where the XPL token must justify itself against exactly the value-accrual skepticism this publication applies everywhere.

Stable’s risk is the mirror: a rail so minimal that its moat is only execution and alignment, with no ecosystem gravity to retain users who arrive, and a token whose value case, as our STABLE guide argues, waits on governance decisions nobody has made. One chain risks being too much; the other risks being too little; and both share the risk that actually matters, which lives in Asia, on the incumbent.

Tron: the enemy both were built to fight The polite framing says Plasma and Stable address different segments. The impolite truth is that both exist to take the same prize: the roughly 45% of all USDT that lives on Tron and the fee flows it generates.

Tron’s dominance is the most underexamined fact in stablecoin land. It hosts the largest share of the largest stablecoin, it carries the remittance and exchange-settlement flows of the markets where USDT is not a trading chip but a savings technology, and its moat is precisely the kind that whitepapers cannot breach: cash-network effects, integrations in thousands of local exchanges and OTC desks, muscle memory in a hundred million wallets, and fees that, while meaningfully nonzero, are known, tolerated, and priced into every corridor.

Both challengers aim at it explicitly, Plasma’s remittance-routing pitch is skip Tron’s TRX gas requirement, Stable’s free-transfer pitch is the same sentence with different plumbing, and both discovered what challengers of payment incumbents always discover: users do not migrate for architecture, they migrate when their exchange, their employer, or their remittance app migrates, which makes the war a business-development grind, not a technology contest.

The scoreboard that matters is therefore not TVL or transaction counts, both inflatable, but the share of USDT supply resident on each chain, and by that measure the war has barely begun: Tron’s share has eroded only at the edges, the challengers’ combined float remains a fraction of it, and the incumbent retains the advantage every toll-road owner has, profitability that funds its own retention incentives.

Which is exactly why the two-chain strategy makes sense from the issuer’s chair, and this is the piece’s resolving move. Tether does not need to pick the winning design; it needs the fee leak plugged and the rail owned by family, and funding two philosophies is how a portfolio manager attacks an uncertain market: Plasma tests whether a subsidized DeFi economy can bootstrap payments gravity, Stable tests whether enterprise minimalism can, the two chains’ competition sharpens both faster than monopoly would, and every dollar of USDT float either one wins from Tron or Ethereum converts leaked fees into family economics.

If both succeed, the market segments, retail-and-DeFi on one, institutional on the other, and the issuer owns the whole stack. If one dies, the survivor inherits its lessons and its float. The only losing scenario is the status quo, and the status quo is the thing costing $2.9 billion a year.

Wars are usually negative-sum for the combatants and profitable for the arms dealer; this one was designed by the arms dealer, which is the fact to keep in view as the ecosystem spends the next year pretending the two chains are not aimed at each other, and at Tron, and, quietly, at the $2.9 billion.

The regulatory shadow both chains share One more force shapes the war from outside it, and the family’s own coverage of Washington makes it unavoidable: both chains are Tether-ecosystem infrastructure launching into the exact regulatory window in which American law is deciding what offshore-issued dollars may do.

The GENIUS Act’s stablecoin framework, whose missed implementation deadlines this publication has chronicled, and the CLARITY Act’s market-structure fight, live on the Senate floor this very week, together draw the perimeter that will define both chains’ addressable markets. The core exposure is identical for both: USDT remains an offshore-issued dollar under frameworks built to privilege domestically regulated issuance, and every corridor the chains win converts informal USDT usage into visible, systematic flows that regulators can see, name, and gate.

The chains’ opposite strategies produce opposite versions of the exposure. Stable’s enterprise pitch runs toward the regulated world on purpose, courting institutions whose compliance departments must bless the rail, which makes it the family’s test of whether Tether-aligned infrastructure can pass American diligence at all. Plasma’s retail-and-DeFi economy runs away from that scrutiny by construction, thriving in exactly the permissionless corridors that the illicit-finance provisions of every pending bill target.

One chain bets the family can join the regulated system; the other bets it can outgrow the need to; and the legislation moving through Congress this month will grade both bets before either chain’s technology does. The honest summary for the cluster this piece opens: the fee-leak war is the family’s offensive campaign, and the regulatory perimeter is its defensive one, and the second war, unlike the first, is not one the issuer designed.

The third bidder nobody prices One actor complicates the family war’s tidy geometry, and the honest map includes it: the incumbent chains are not standing still, and the war’s most likely spoiler is not either challenger failing but the leak becoming cheaper to tolerate.

Tron’s defense is already visible in its pricing behavior: the network has periodically tuned its resource model when migration pressure rises, and its operator retains the toll-road owner’s ultimate weapon, the ability to cut fees toward zero in the corridors under attack while keeping them positive everywhere else, a price-discrimination play incumbents from airlines to telecoms have run against cherry-picking entrants forever. Every basis point Tron shaves narrows the challengers’ pitch, and Tron can shave from profits while the challengers subsidize from war chests, an asymmetry that favors the incumbent in any prolonged price war.

Ethereum’s defense is structural: the institutional and DeFi USDT that lives there is the stickiest float in the ecosystem, held for composability with the deepest markets in crypto, and no payments-optimized rail competes for it at all, which is why the realistic battlefield is Tron’s remittance float, not Ethereum’s collateral float, and why the challengers’ addressable prize is meaningfully smaller than the headline $2.9 billion suggests.

And there is a fourth trajectory the war could take, the one the arms-dealer framing predicts: the leak becoming the product. Tether’s ecosystem does not strictly need either chain to win the migration war if the chains’ existence disciplines the incumbents’ pricing, converts the issuer from rate-taker to rate-negotiator, and hands the family credible exit infrastructure it can invoke in every commercial conversation with Tron.

Leverage, not conquest, may be the strategy’s real deliverable: the $373 million and the $2 billion pre-deposits purchase, at minimum, the ability to move, and the ability to move is what turns a captive tenant into a negotiating one. On this reading, the two chains are already succeeding, quietly, in the only meeting that matters, and the float-share scoreboard understates a war whose first victory is a better lease.

What to watch USDT float by chain, quarterly: The war’s only honest scoreboard: the share of total USDT supply resident on Plasma and Stable versus Tron and Ethereum. Transaction counts inflate; resident float is the fee leak actually moving. Watch whether the challengers’ combined share reaches double digits, and whose share it comes from.

The subsidy postures: Plasma’s paymaster spend against its DeFi economy’s fee generation, and Stable’s emission schedule against its enterprise fee flows: both chains’ free tiers have funding models this publication’s framework can grade, and the first one to show cross-subsidy covering the free lane has found the sustainable shape.

A corridor flip: The event that would actually move the war: a major remittance processor, exchange, or payments app moving a named corridor’s settlement from Tron to either challenger. One real corridor outweighs any TVL milestone, and business-development announcements of that specific shape are the tell.

The issuer’s hand: Canonical USDT issuance decisions, where Tether mints natively versus where USDT0 bridges, are the issuer quietly picking favorites, and any consolidation move, shared infrastructure, a merger, a formal designation of lanes, would be the portfolio manager closing a position. The war ends the way it started: by family decision.

A closing note on the observable that will settle the philosophies faster than any strategy memo: developer behavior. Chains are chosen twice, once by users moving money and once by builders deploying products, and the two chains’ opposite designs make opposite bids for the second constituency. Plasma’s full EVM economy with a hundred day-one DeFi integrations bids for builders with composability and a token to align them; Stable’s enterprise blockspace bids with predictability and a customer base of institutions that pay for boredom.

The early returns are legible in the metrics each side brags about: TVL and integrations on one side, pre-deposits and enterprise partnerships on the other, and the metric each side avoids, and the first year of divergence will show whether payments infrastructure in crypto follows the platform playbook, where ecosystems win, or the utility playbook, where reliability does.

Tron, for what it is worth, won its position with neither: it won with distribution into exchanges and remittance desks before anyone was watching, which is the quiet reminder that the war’s decisive constituency may be neither users nor builders but the few hundred business-development conversations, with processors, exchanges, and payroll providers, that actually move float at scale. Both challengers know it, which is why the war’s real battles will be invisible, fought in integration roadmaps and settlement agreements, and reported, if at all, one corridor at a time.

Frequently Asked Questions What are Plasma and Stable, in one line each? Plasma is a general-purpose stablecoin Layer 1, live since September, with a native token (XPL), a paymaster making simple USDT transfers free, and a DeFi ecosystem around $551 million in TVL. Stable is a payments-focused Layer 1, live since December, where USDT0 itself is the gas asset, simple transfers are free by protocol rule, and the focus is enterprise and institutional flows.

Why does Tether’s ecosystem back both? Because the strategic problem, roughly $2.9 billion a year in USDT-related network fees leaking to chains outside the family, above all Tron and Ethereum, matters more than which design solves it. Backing two opposite philosophies is portfolio logic: each tests a different route to repatriating the fee flow, competition sharpens both, and any float either wins converts leaked economics into aligned economics.

How do the two chains differ technically? Plasma keeps a conventional chain economy: XPL handles staking and settlement, a paymaster subsidizes the free USDT lane, the EVM ecosystem is fully general, and Bitcoin anchoring plus confidential transfers extend the feature set. Stable removes the separate gas asset entirely, USDT0 pays fees, simple transfers are exempt, the STABLE token is confined to staking and governance, and capacity is marketed as enterprise blockspace.

Are they really competitors, or complementary? Directly competitive, whatever the diplomatic framing. Both target the existing USDT float and the same migration sources, Tron’s remittance corridors first, and both pitch the identical headline benefit of free dollar transfers. Segmentation into retail-DeFi versus institutional lanes is a possible equilibrium, but it would be an outcome of the competition, not an alternative to it.

Why is Tron the real target? Tron carries roughly 45% of all USDT, the largest share of the largest stablecoin, concentrated in the remittance and exchange-settlement corridors where USDT functions as everyday money. Its fees are the biggest single component of the ecosystem’s leak, and its moat, integrations, habits, and cash-network effects, is the one both challengers were engineered to attack, so far with only marginal erosion.

What would winning look like for either chain? Resident USDT float, not activity metrics. A challenger reaching a double-digit share of total USDT supply, or flipping a named remittance corridor’s settlement from Tron, would mark real progress. For the issuer’s ecosystem, winning is broader: any combination of outcomes that moves fee flows from external chains to family-aligned ones, including a split decision where both chains hold different segments.

What are the main risks to each? Plasma: the general-purpose trap, competing for DeFi against far larger ecosystems while its free lane depends on subsidy, and an XPL token facing the standard value-accrual skepticism. Stable: the minimalism trap, a rail with no ecosystem gravity, a token whose value case awaits governance decisions, and reliance on enterprise adoption cycles that move slowly. Both: Tron’s incumbency and the possibility that users simply do not migrate.

What does this mean for USDT holders? Little direct risk and some structural benefit: the chains compete to make USDT cheaper and easier to move, and the omnichain plumbing (USDT0) connecting them is the same system this publication’s guides describe, with the same trust stack. The war’s outcome matters more for XPL and STABLE holders, whose tokens are claims on the respective designs winning, and for the fee economics of Tron and Ethereum, the incumbents being challenged. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.

Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Figures for fees, revenues, TVL, and supply shares are estimates drawn from third-party research and change continuously. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any asset. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of July 24, 2026.

July 22, 2026 at 5:00 PM EDT

Updated on

July 22, 2026 at 6:27 PM EDT

It was billed as cryptocurrency’s big moment, President Donald Trump’s first legislative victory in his drive to make the US the “crypto capital of the world.”

Surrounded by lawmakers and industry executives in the East Room of the White House, Trump signed the Genius Act into law a year ago this month, celebrating it as a step toward bringing digital assets into the mainstream of American finance.

By providing the first set of federal rules for a type of crypto known as stablecoins, the legislation aimed to inspire public confidence in a $300 billion marketplace. It promised protections against fraud by forcing companies to open their books. And it gave Congress a chance to follow through on attempts to address one of crypto’s most longstanding concerns — the persistent use of stablecoins among criminals, terrorists and sanctions evaders — by bringing companies under the watch of US regulators, whether they’re based in the US or not.

But in interviews and a court filing, an inside account of the negotiations surrounding the law has emerged: In the months before and after Trump took office, his advisers Howard Lutnick and Bo Hines worked behind the scenes to loosen those safeguards and shape the law in ways that benefited the world’s dominant stablecoin issuer, Tether. Among Trump’s advisers, Lutnick and Hines played the most formative roles in a legislative process that ultimately included measures favorable to Tether, according to people familiar with the discussions. The people, like dozens of others who provided details of negotiations surrounding the Genius Act for this story — crypto industry executives, lobbyists and current and former US government officials — requested anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the talks.

US President Donald Trump signed the Genius Act in the White House on July 18, 2025. He hailed the bill as a “giant step to cement American dominance of global finance and crypto technology.” Photographer: Al Drago/BloombergBefore Lutnick became Trump’s commerce secretary, he was chairman and chief executive officer of the Wall Street investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald, which manages Tether’s assets. From that position, he acted as a crisis manager throughout 2024, countering bad publicity about Tether and seeking to influence lawmakers on legislation the company opposed, according to congressional lobbying records, allegations contained in a federal court filing and one person who was briefed on those efforts.

After Trump took office, Hines was the closer. The then-29-year-old White House aide, a North Carolina entrepreneur and crypto investor who ran unsuccessful congressional campaigns as a Republican in 2022 and 2024, became the administration’s self-described “bully” on the bill. As negotiations neared the finish line, Hines said that a provision Tether wanted was a “red line” for the White House, according to three other people familiar with the matter.

This account of how the legislation took shape shows the previously unreported steps that first Lutnick, then Hines took that benefited Tether, which controls about 60% of the global stablecoin market. And it sheds new light on the ways that the administration’s policymaking has aligned with its appointees’ financial interests. Both Hines and Lutnick have received significant benefits from the company.

Over an 18-month period that began in 2024 and ended shortly after the passage of the Genius Act, Tether executives:

Sold the rights to a multibillion-dollar stake in their company to Lutnick’s financial services firm in April 2024 for $600 million, a price that Tether’s chairman described to a business associate as “bloody cheap.”

Invested $775 million in December 2024 in Rumble Inc., a money-losing technology company that has a partnership agreement with the unprofitable firm that runs Trump’s Truth Social platform and counts several Trump associates as investors.

Hired Hines for an executive position in August 2025, roughly one month after the bill was signed.

Made a loan to a trust benefiting Lutnick’s children as they were purchasing their father’s multibillion-dollar business interests in October 2025.

As part of a federal ethics agreement required of cabinet appointees, Lutnick had pledged to sell his stake in Cantor Fitzgerald and to recuse himself from matters that might present a conflict of interest. A spokesperson for the Commerce Department did not answer detailed questions for this story but said Lutnick complied with the terms of that agreement; divested from his holdings, including Tether; and “was not involved in any matters relating to the Genius Act’s stablecoin provisions.”

Hines didn’t respond to detailed requests for comment. Neither did the White House.

Tether said in a statement that the company “strongly rejects any suggestion that its engagement with policymakers regarding stablecoin legislation was improper” and that it regularly interacts with regulators, legislators and law enforcement officials “lawfully, transparently, and alongside a broad range of market participants.” The company also said the Genius Act provides no “special advantages to Tether,” arguing that the new US regulatory plans will “apply across the industry to any issuer seeking to operate under the framework.”

The bill drew intense lobbying from all corners of finance, including crypto exchanges, credit card companies and community banks. But Tether is by far the industry’s dominant issuer — its biggest competitor is half its size — and it had the most at stake during the 2025 discussions.

Since the law was signed, Tether, which operates from El Salvador, has continued to grow. It launched a new US token to reach American consumers and comply with the rules. Yet its core product remains the world’s most widely used stablecoin — and a go-to currency for terrorists, North Korean hackers and sanctioned entities in both Iran and Russia, according to reports compiled by industry researchers and government officials. Under the Genius Act’s provisions, that coin, known as USDT, may never be subject to regulation by US authorities.

The Genius Act’s final form contained provisions that benefited Tether and differed from federal lawmakers’ previous attempts to regulate stablecoins, which offer users convenience and pseudo-anonymity — meaning their actual identities are hidden even though their alphanumeric wallet addresses remain permanently public on the blockchain.

0:00

/

0:00

In 2023 and 2024, members of Congress proposed bipartisan legislation that aimed to push foreign companies such as Tether to submit to US regulatory scrutiny — including anti-money-laundering rules — if they wanted to sell stablecoins in the US.

The Genius Act relaxed that requirement. A provision that critics call the “reciprocity loophole” would allow Tether’s USDT to be regulated by El Salvador, where the company is building a new headquarters, if the US Treasury secretary determines the Salvadoran regulatory scheme is comparable to the US approach. Rules governing such determinations are still being drafted.

Another change limited stablecoin issuers’ responsibility for ensuring that their tokens aren’t misused by criminals, terrorists or sanctions evaders. That language, known as the “defi loophole,” means that companies like Tether aren’t responsible for tracking their products on secondary markets known as decentralized finance, or “defi,” platforms. Unlike those who buy tokens through banks or exchanges, such users can trade directly on the blockchain without identifying who they are or how they intend to use the funds.

The legislation also created a three-year grace period for selling stablecoins in the US before their issuers have to comply with its terms. As lawmakers negotiated the bill’s final details, some Democrats proposed a tighter time frame, 18 months, but Tether wanted three years, according to people familiar with its position. At that point, Hines stepped in.

In negotiations, he told people that Tether was important to the White House and Republicans should stand firm. Keeping the three-year grace period was a “red line,” Hines said, according to three people familiar with his conversations.

Bo Hines, whom Trump named executive director of the Presidential Council of Advisers for Digital Assets, took a leadership role in pushing the Genius Act through Congress. Photographer: Tierney L. Cross/BloombergSome financial experts warn that these provisions may undermine US attempts to fight money laundering by criminals and sanctioned entities while complicating Trump’s stated goal of making the US the world’s leader in digital currencies.

Timothy Massad, a former assistant secretary at the US Treasury Department during President Barack Obama’s administration, said the failure to close these so-called loopholes might put US crypto companies at a competitive disadvantage by allowing foreign issuers to sidestep costly anti-money-laundering regulations. It could also weaken the dollar, he said.

“If we want the dollar to remain the strong reserve currency of the world, we shouldn’t enable terrorists and sanctioned individuals and criminals to move dollars anonymously,” said Massad, who also served as chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from 2014 to 2017.

Every form of currency is vulnerable to misuse for illicit transactions. But since it introduced USDT in 2014, Tether has faced regular questions about the scrutiny it brings to its customers. In response, the company had argued that its location overseas meant it could resist what it described as US regulatory overreach. But that position evolved over time, and in December 2023, Tether announced a policy of voluntarily freezing wallets of any people or entities sanctioned by the US Treasury.

Investigators continued to find evidence that USDT was being used for such activities as the fentanyl trade in Mexico and Russian sanctions evasion. A January 2024 UN report called USDT “a preferred choice” for crypto money launderers in Southeast Asia. That year, President Joe Biden’s National Security Council debated whether to ban Tether from selling its token in the US, according to two people familiar with the talks, who asked not to be named to discuss a sensitive matter.

Ultimately, that proposal was disregarded after law enforcement officials argued that they could track illicit finance through USDT transactions. Over time, federal law enforcement officials have praised Tether for becoming more helpful in freezing tokens used by bad actors.

“The company has built one of the most effective law enforcement cooperation programs in global finance,” Tether’s spokesman said in response to questions. The company said it’s committed to deterring financial crime, and the Genius Act will strengthen such efforts.

Even so, throughout the debates over the Genius Act — and since then — USDT has remained a frequent choice for illicit users.

Throughout 2025, the sanctioned Central Bank of Iran purchased $507 million of Tether’s USDT, according to Elliptic, a blockchain analytics firm widely used by leading digital assets companies and traditional banks. That July, the same month Trump signed the act, Elliptic found that almost $2.5 billion worth of Tether’s USDT was received by wallets linked to Russian companies that, according to the Treasury Department, provide “cross-border settlement platforms for sanctions evasion.”

This year alone, more than $4 billion worth of the token was used in illicit marketplaces favored by Chinese scam networks — which perpetrate crimes including crypto cons known as pig butchering, impersonation frauds and sextortion — according to data by Elliptic.

And in the US, federal prosecutors across the country have filed scores of claims since July 2025 seeking to seize at least $172 million worth of USDT that they said was used unlawfully, according to court records.

Tether has more than twice as many tokens in circulation as its biggest competitor, Circle Internet Group Inc., but has fewer than half as many employees and uses contractors to conduct some of its analysis of suspicious transactions. Tether declined to answer specific questions about the size of its compliance department. But the company said it “works directly and regularly with over 340 law enforcement agencies across 67 jurisdictions to identify, freeze, and help recover assets linked to illicit activity.”

“This is not theoretical compliance but measurable, operational cooperation that no financial institution, including many traditional banks, can match,” said the company spokesman.

Lutnick’s CampaignsWhen Lutnick’s firm, Cantor Fitzgerald, began managing Tether’s reserves in 2021, the investment banker had already known Trump for decades. By that time, Trump was a one-term president, seeking a return to the White House. Tether was a hugely profitable company with an image problem. In 2024, Lutnick campaigned hard for them both.

Despite the importance of assuring buyers that its tokens are backed by safe assets, Tether has never published an independent audit detailing its reserves. In 2021, the company and a related exchange paid $61 million to settle claims brought by federal regulators and New York State (where it is banned from operating) that Tether misled investors about its reserves. Tether acknowledged no wrongdoing in the settlements. As written, the Genius Act will require stablecoin issuers to publish annual audits. Tether announced this year that it had hired an auditor, though it hasn’t disclosed any plans for releasing an audit.

Howard Lutnick, who was chairman and chief executive officer of Cantor Fitzgerald at the time, at the opening day of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2024. Source: BloombergAmid questions about Tether’s reserves, Lutnick came to the company’s public defense. In January 2024, he traveled to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and declared on Bloomberg TV: “They have the money they say they have.”

The following month, Lutnick traveled to El Salvador, where he met with Tether’s chairman, Giancarlo Devasini, and the country’s crypto-friendly President Nayib Bukele, the self-styled “world’s coolest dictator.” Last year, Tether announced plans to relocate its headquarters to the country’s capital, San Salvador.

And in April 2024, Cantor Fitzgerald acquired the right to a 5% stake in Tether through a $600 million convertible bond — a transaction that wasn’t publicly reported until November, after Trump won the presidency. The price was a remarkable discount, based on Tether’s own accounting: In 2024, it reported profit of about $13 billion, which suggests the company was worth at least $130 billion, according to a benchmark of publicly listed financial firms. At that level, Cantor’s $600 million stake was worth more than $6 billion on paper.

Devasini called the price Cantor paid “bloody cheap,” according to Cory Klippsten, a Bitcoin entrepreneur who met with Tether executives and Lutnick in 2024.

Klippsten was involved in a business partnership with Tether that ultimately broke down, and the sides wound up in litigation. In court filings, Klippsten has accused Tether executives of poaching his employees, code and other trade secrets and reneging on a deal; Tether has accused Klippsten of improperly using Tether’s investment as collateral in a separate transaction. As part of the litigation, Klippsten is seeking to depose Lutnick and review documents about Cantor Fitzgerald’s relationship with Tether. An attorney for Lutnick said in court that the commerce secretary had no role in the dispute and that the request is meant to “harass and embarrass” Lutnick.

In a March court filing, Klippsten said he had taken contemporaneous notes detailing his conversations with Devasini. He recounted some of those notes in filings — including the “bloody cheap” remark. The filing describes Cantor’s convertible bond as “implicit compensation for acting as Tether’s advocate in Washington and the media.”

Stalled LegislationMembers of Congress had developed their own concerns. In late 2023, Republican Senator Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming co-signed a letter urging the Justice Department to determine whether Tether was “providing material support and resources” to terrorism organizations, including Hamas, during the deadly attacks that October in Israel. In April 2024, Lummis and Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York introduced a bill that could have required any stablecoin issuer doing business in the US to submit to US anti-money-laundering restrictions and disclosure requirements.

At the time, Lummis made clear that to enter the US market, Tether would have to comply with US rules. “So Tether, if it chooses to remain offshore, if it’s happier with a different regulator, that’s a business choice for them,” she told CoinDesk shortly after announcing the new legislation. “But if they want the US Good Housekeeping seal of approval on their product, and we hope they will, that they’ll come into compliance in the US.”

That July, Lutnick took another opportunity to defend Tether at the 2024 Bitcoin conference in Nashville, where Trump gave the keynote address. “We would never, ever be associated with a company that has anything to do with jihad,” Lutnick said, his voice rising in anger as he reminded the audience that more than 650 Cantor employees, including his brother, had died in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attack on the World Trade Center. “And it disgusts me.”

Trump speaks at the Bitcoin 2024 conference in Nashville, in July 2024. Photographer: Brett Carlsen/BloombergAfter that speech, Trump — who had pivoted from crypto skeptic to crypto supporter in 2024 as he and his family members prepared to invest in the industry — invited Lutnick to join him on his campaign plane and asked him to be co-chairman of his transition committee. They flew to Minnesota, where Lutnick warmed up the crowd on stage before then-Senator JD Vance of Ohio, another vocal crypto advocate, spoke.

Trump’s surging candidacy buoyed the mood among Tether executives, according to Klippsten. “They have HOPE right now,” his notes say. “They could fly to NYC. Go on CNBC. That’s what Trump is offering them.”

Lutnick traveled in 2024 to Washington, where Cantor Fitzgerald’s lobbyists were engaging with members of Congress on stablecoin bills circulating in the House and Senate. He had a meeting with North Carolina Representative Patrick McHenry, then-chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, to discuss how a new law would affect a foreign company like Tether, according to a person familiar with the talks. McHenry didn’t respond to requests for comment. Lutnick also met with Lummis in September, although a spokesperson for the senator said the discussion focused on a potential Trump transition team and only briefly touched on her concerns about Tether and financial crimes.

The spokesperson said that Lummis “was never urged to back off of her support” for her bill, “nor was she pressured in any manner by Secretary Lutnick or those around him to make changes.”

One of Klippsten’s notes, recounted in a court filing, says that Devasini, Tether’s chairman, told him: “According to Howard, he managed to kill every bill about stablecoins, crypto, etc. There’s still some days before Congress comes to a halt. Howard says don’t expect anything upsetting.”

The bills went nowhere. The next year, both Lummis and Gillibrand voted for the Genius Act, including its provision allowing for “reciprocal” regulation by foreign countries. A spokesman for Gillibrand declined to comment on her vote. A spokesperson for Lummis said it’s not unusual for senators to “vote for something that doesn’t perfectly reflect their preferred way of regulating.” This year, Lummis is leading Senate discussions on a bill that would establish a regulatory framework for the rest of the crypto industry, beyond stablecoins.

After Trump’s November 2024 victory, Cantor helped arrange a new investment for Tether that put the stablecoin issuer more firmly into Trump’s business orbit. Around Christmas, the company invested $775 million in Rumble, the conservative video streaming company that hosts Trump’s Truth Social media platform and provides it with cloud infrastructure and advertising services.

The investment came at an unusual time; Rumble had run up $338 million in losses that year. The company, which bills itself as a “freedom-first” alternative to livestreaming and video content, counted several Trump allies who eventually joined his second administration among its investors: Vice President Vance; former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino; and former White House special adviser for AI and crypto David Sacks.

Tether’s investment set off a temporary spike in Rumble’s share price, and it closed on Dec. 26 at $16.27, a 126% gain since the day of the announcement. Rumble, which has rebranded itself as RUM Group Inc., devoted almost 68% of Tether’s investment, $525 million, to share buybacks from “certain members of key management.” Since then, Tether has gradually increased its equity stake in Rumble; it now amounts to roughly $875 million.

“Tether’s investment in Rumble reflects our shared values of decentralization, transparency and fundamental right to free expression,” Tether’s chief executive officer, Paolo Ardoino, said at the time. The company said roughly $250 million of its infusion would go for “growth initiatives,” including a crypto payments platform.

As Trump’s second administration took shape, the White House handed responsibility for shepherding stablecoin legislation to a former college football player whose introduction to cryptocurrency came when he played in the 2014 Bitcoin St. Petersburg Bowl.

‘Hi, Bo!’As a Washington newcomer, Bo Hines didn’t have a resume to match the crypto industry leaders and congressional staffers he met with regularly. But at 6-foot-1 and 205 pounds, he had other attributes welcome in Trump’s White House: a camera-ready jaw line, a staunch belief in the MAGA agenda and a documented refusal to accept the results of the 2020 presidential election. Also, during the fall of 2024, a business he operated with his father donated $1 million in billboard advertising to a political action committee supporting Trump’s campaign.

As the president’s choice to head the new administration’s council on digital assets, Hines worked on a range of issues, from establishing a federal stockpile of digital currencies to recommending new guidelines for regulation of crypto. A top priority was the Genius Act.

By early February 2025, the bill was circulating in Washington. Later that month, as crypto executives and lawmakers gathered at Washington’s Willard Hotel to discuss the bill, a surprise visitor showed up, according to two people who attended: Tether’s Ardoino. He told his fellow attendees that his company was serious about deterring money laundering, the people said.

In March, Ardoino posted photos of himself at the US Capitol and the White House. He told the New York Times that he’d been careful not to speak with Lutnick after Lutnick’s February confirmation as commerce secretary, to avoid any conflicts of interest.

That same month, Tether hired a Washington lobbyist who’d been representing Cantor Fitzgerald on stablecoin-related issues since 2024: Jeff Miller. Miller served in leadership roles for both of Trump’s inauguration committees, and his firm had become one of Washington’s most successful during Trump’s first term. Throughout 2025, Miller Strategies was paid $570,000 — with $480,000 from Cantor and $90,000 from Tether. “It’s very important that our voice is properly heard,” Ardoino told Bloomberg TV.

Hines, meanwhile, settled into his job. He argued that lawmakers had no right to oppose the president’s wishes, said people familiar with the matter, and pressured them to reach speedy agreements. He also began signaling that he considered concerns about the illicit use of digital tokens to be overblown. “You’re a pretty dumb criminal if you want to use digital assets to do something nefarious because that can be traced publicly in many cases,” he said during an April interview with Bitcoin Magazine.

The earliest drafts of the Genius Act troubled Tether’s competitors and Democratic lawmakers because it walked back restrictions that had been written into the 2024 versions of stablecoin legislation.

In May, a group of Democrats — including those seen as moderates on crypto — revolted, temporarily blocking the measure from advancing. In a closed-door meeting with other Democrats, two people familiar with the matter said, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York implored his colleagues to review records the Biden administration’s National Security Council had compiled about Tether’s practices and make certain the Genius Act provided strong enough safeguards to deter money laundering by US adversaries.

That month, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren urged other Democrats to reject the latest version of the bill, which she said loosened the rules to further benefit Tether.

Senator Elizabeth Warren questioned the Genius Act’s provisions. Source: Senator Elizabeth Warren/YouTubeHines brushed such concerns aside, according to people familiar with the discussions. He often invoked Trump, saying that the president wanted a deal done soon. Republican legislative leaders pressed on with the bill.

A late hurdle was the timing of the bill’s provisions. During private negotiations, Hines insisted that Republicans refuse to drop the three-year grace period — even though Democrats were seeking to cut it in half. In meetings, he said that Tether wanted three years, said three people familiar with the matter.

Ultimately, Hines prevailed. The July bill signing ceremony brought many of the bill’s important supporters together at the White House.

“Where’s Bo Hines?” Trump asked from the dais, scanning until he spotted him in the front row. “Hi, Bo! And Bo was a great football player, right? Bo was a great football player, one of the better players in college football so I know you from that also.” (Hines was a standout receiver for the North Carolina State Wolfpack in 2014; he subsequently transferred to Yale University, where shoulder injuries hampered his football career.)

Hines stood to a round of applause and sat down. To his immediate right, also in the front row, was Tether’s CEO, Ardoino. One month later, Tether announced that it was hiring Hines as an adviser. Soon thereafter, he was promoted to chief executive of Tether’s new US product called USAT. This new token accounts for just a fraction of Tether’s business, with roughly $186 million of them in circulation. Hines told a crypto conference last year that he expects both USAT and USDT to meet Genius Act standards.

Also seated in the signing ceremony’s front row, between Hines and Vice President Vance, was Lutnick. Trump called on him to stand for applause, praising his work on tariff negotiations. “You have done a great job, Howard,” the president said.

Three months later, Lutnick completed the sale of Cantor Fitzgerald to trusts benefiting his children. The day after it closed, a document was filed in New York that showed Tether had loaned one of those trusts an undisclosed sum of money.

Lutnick has declined to reveal what his children paid for his holdings or whether the loan they received from Tether was used to finance the transaction. That year, Tether had been speaking to investors about a $500 billion capital raise. At that valuation, Cantor Fitzgerald’s potential 5% stake in the company would have been worth $25 billion on paper.

(Updates to say in 15th paragraph that Tether's statement came directly from the company.)

Strike will remain a standalone company after the proposed three-way merger was scrapped, while Twenty One Capital and Elektron continue discussions, Bloomberg reported.

A proposed merger involving Tether-backed crypto companies Twenty One Capital, Strike and Elektron Energy has reportedly been scrapped.

Jack Mallers will step down as CEO of Twenty One Capital while remaining CEO of Strike, according to Bloomberg. Elektron Energy CEO Raphael Zagury has been appointed to succeed Mallers.

Strike will continue operating as a standalone company instead of combining with Twenty One Capital. Discussions between Twenty One and Elektron are continuing, Bloomberg reported. Tether holds majority stakes in both companies.

Twenty One’s (XXI) NYSE-traded shares were little changed in Tuesday’s premarket activity.

As Cointelegraph reported in April, Tether said it planned to vote in favor of a proposed merger between Twenty One Capital and Mallers’ Bitcoin payments company, Strike. The proposal also envisioned merging the combined company with Bitcoin miner Elektron Energy.

Twenty One Capital launched in 2025 with backing from Tether, Cantor Fitzgerald and SoftBank. Tether bought SoftBank’s stake in the company in May.

Twenty One held 43,514 Bitcoin at the time of writing, making it the world’s second-largest corporate BTC holder behind Michael Saylor’s Strategy, according to tracking website BitcoinTreasuries.

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

Tether has secured recognition for its Tether Gold (XAUT) token as an Accepted Spot Commodity within the Abu Dhabi Global Market, clearing the way for authorized firms in the financial center to offer services tied to the gold-backed digital asset under ADGM’s regulatory framework, according to a Monday statement.

XAUT is a tokenized gold product issued by Tether that gives holders ownership of one fine troy ounce of physical gold per token, with the bullion stored in secure vaults, mainly in Switzerland.

Advertisement

The token has a market value of nearly $2.5 billion and is issued on both the Ethereum (ERC-20) and Tron (TRC-20) blockchains, allowing investors to buy, transfer and trade gold digitally while retaining rights to allocated London Good Delivery bars.

According to the company, the approval follows close collaboration with ADGM to demonstrate its compliance standards and operational transparency.

The recognition provides a formal regulatory framework for XAUT in the financial center and further strengthens Tether’s footprint in the UAE as the country continues developing its digital asset ecosystem. Tether Gold is backed on a one-to-one basis by physical gold, with each token representing one troy fine ounce of gold from a London Good Delivery bar.

Tether said the latest approval expands on ADGM’s previous recognition of USDT and highlights the increasing adoption of tokenized real-world assets among institutional investors.

The company said it will continue working with regulators and industry partners across the Middle East to support regulated digital asset markets.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Jul 19, 2026, 1:00 p.m.

6 min read

The U.S. GENIUS Act to regulate stablecoins just hit a milestone, and Tether may have some compliance work ahead of it. (Jesse Hamilton/CoinDesk)Summary

The GENIUS Act that governs U.S. stablecoin issuers is complicated and a work-in-progress, but now that its first anniversary is reached, Tether and other non-U.S. issuers have two years left to figure out their compliance strategies. The one-year mark was supposed to see the federal financial regulators finishing their stablecoin rules, but none have done so, yet, leaving some compliance uncertainty. The basic outlines of the U.S. standards, though, would force the most widely circulated coin — Tether’s USDT — to make a lot of major changes before it could satisfy the law. The world's leading stablecoin by volume, Tether's USDT, could be shoved out of the U.S. markets if the company doesn't revamp dramatically in the next two years.

Despite assurances last year from CEO Paolo Ardoino that the stablecoin giant would achieve U.S. compliance for USDT, the company hasn't yet revealed a sharp turn toward the demands of the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act, which became law one year ago.

With that consequential anniversary of President Donald Trump's signing of the law passing on Saturday, the industry has marked a surge in stablecoin interest and issuance, plus a wide array of crypto and traditional financial firms pursuing U.S. trust bank charters to ease their stablecoin pathways. But the one-year mark was also supposed to be a deadline for federal financial regulators to have rules in place implementing GENIUS, and they've so far fallen short. That could be problematic as experts and industry insiders still reveal some disagreements over how the law should be interpreted.

At this point, it's still two firms battling for market dominance, with a few others — including the issuer tied to President Donald Trump, World Liberty Financial — fighting it out for a very distant third place. Tether's chief rival, U.S.-based Circle, has made more of an apparent effort to pre-comply with what U.S. regulations will soon require.

Meanwhile, Tether's most recent disclosures suggest as much as a quarter of USDT's reserves — the stockpile meant to ensure that those redeeming their coins will always be able to — were still plugged into assets that won't meet GENIUS Act standards, such as precious metals, lending and bitcoin BTC$64,666.25 holdings. GENIUS requires that issuers are fully reserved in the most highly liquid and reliable assets — essentially cash and U.S. Treasuries.

"Tether will comply with the GENIUS Act," Ardoino told CoinDesk at the White House, in the moments after Trump signed GENIUS a year ago. While the CEO indicated then that his company would pursue a separate U.S.-specific token, he said that USDT would also be managed to meet the law's foreign-issuer standards.

When asked multiple times for an update on its compliance stance in recent days, representatives of El Salvador-based Tether didn't offer a response.

This year, Tether rolled out USAT — launched with U.S. standards in mind and issued through U.S. banking partner Anchorage Digital. So far, it remains at a relatively low level of usage.

“Non-compliant stablecoins cannot be used by U.S. institutions when the safe harbor expires in 2028, but we don’t expect the market to wait," said Kevin Wysocki, head of policy at Anchorage Digital, the crypto-native bank that manages a number of stablecoins. He said the company believes institutional users will move toward "compliant, bank-issued digital dollars well ahead of that deadline."

Do they have two years?GENIUS included a three-year grace period for compliance, and two years remain, after which U.S. crypto platforms won't be able to offer stablecoins whose issuers haven't checked all the regulatory boxes. However, there seems to be some disagreement over whether foreign issuers are meant to enjoy that same safe harbor. Some lawyers in finance assume that Tether gets until July 18, 2028, to comply, but others have suggested that foreign issuers would have to comply the moment GENIUS officially goes live, which is likely six months from now in January.

"Upon the effectiveness of the GENIUS Act, foreign issuers will need to immediately comply with lawful orders to seize and freeze coins held by illicit actors, but they will have a runway of approximately two more years to prepare for the additional requirements so that their coins may remain eligible for listing on U.S. centralized trading platforms," said Justin Levine, a lawyer at Davis Polk who advises clients on stablecoin issues, adding that one of those remaining requirements — registration with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency — is likely to require a “significant undertaking”

"So they do have time, as long as they comply with seize and freeze orders,” he said. “But those that want to have their coins continue to be traded on U.S. centralized platforms and have that liquidity should still be thinking about it right now, even if it's not imminent that they're going to get delisted."

While Levine's firm and others have interpreted the deadline for foreign issuers as being two years away, an analysis last year from law firm Paul Hastings had read GENIUS as offering separate timelines for foreign and domestic firms. But after being asked about its view recently, that interpretation was removed from the firm's website, and its spokespeople didn't immediately respond to CoinDesk's requests for clarity.

A dive into the footnotes of federal regulators suggests a two-track deadline in the law. The OCC, the national bank regulator that will also be supervising certain stablecoin issuers, said in a footnote within a proposal for implementing aspects of GENIUS that the drop-dead date was generally in 2028, but that it gets triggered the moment the law is effective (by January) for the coins of foreign issuers that don't meet "certain requirements." Those requirements, though, could simply be referring to the shorter-term demands that include the ability to freeze bad actors' assets and, when requested by the government, to seize them.

The fuller slate of requirements for foreign issuers will eventually include demands that their home regulator be certified by the secretary of the Treasury as being "comparable" to the U.S. regime, that the firms be OCC-registered and they keep their reserves in U.S. institutions.

Regulators run behindHowever, none of the federal agencies have finalized their GENIUS rules, leaving some uncertainty about what will be set into regulatory stone even as the first requirements approach. A number of regulators' efforts are underway and may soon be completed, but others remain in preliminary stages. In other words, companies have no regulations to comply with just yet.

If there's lingering disagreement over GENIUS timelines, Trevor Tanifum, a managing principal at consulting firm FS Vector, said he anticipates that smaller platforms with low risk appetites will delist certain stablecoins and avoid the bother. But others may be willing to press on.

He said that prominent companies with robust legal departments may be willing to occupy a different view, such as: "We're going to spend the money on lawyers and lobbyists until someone walks up to our door and forces us to delist these non-U.S. issuers."

"It's pretty much what has happened, I think, at every major crypto hurdle," he said. "These platforms still count on a lot of transaction volumes, liquidity from non-U.S. issuers, and so I can't see them giving up those volumes without a fight."

The biggest U.S. exchange is Coinbase, but the company declined to discuss its stablecoin listing plans under GENIUS.

The exchange and much of the rest of the crypto industry has more recently shifted policy attention toward a different effort of Congress: the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. The sector's lobbyists had aimed for a one-two punch with GENIUS and Clarity, and they'd succeeded last year in getting the stablecoin bill passed into law.

But that first major crypto law was meant to complement a wider-reaching regulation of U.S. crypto markets under the Clarity Act, which is still languishing in the final weeks of its potential 2026 congressional window. It remains unclear at the first anniversary of the GENIUS Act whether its companion will join it on the books. And if it does, it's likely to include some provisions that overhaul some of GENIUS's language.

Either way, Tether, Circle and the rest of the stablecoin sector are on track to be federally regulated in the coming months under the new law, and how those regulations are navigated may upend which firms play a leading role.

Related Assets

12345678910

Venezuela, a country sitting on the world’s largest proven oil reserves, now has a parallel financial system powered by a token pegged to the US dollar. USDT trading volume in the country reached roughly 75% of monthly oil exports during the period from June 11 to July 13, a figure that would have sounded absurd even two years ago.

How Tether became Venezuela’s shadow dollar PDVSA, Venezuela’s state oil company, began requiring USDT prepayments for oil sales as early as 2023-2024. By Q1 2024, many deals demanded half the cargo value upfront in Tether’s stablecoin.

According to economist Asdrúbal Oliveros, as cited by the Wall Street Journal, an estimated 80% of Venezuela’s oil revenue is expected to be settled in USDT by late 2025 or early 2026.

Advertisement

Venezuela’s total crypto transaction volume tells an even bigger story. Chainalysis data shows the country recorded $44.6 billion in crypto transactions in the 12 months ending June 2025.

The sanctions squeeze and stablecoin escape valve US sanctions on Venezuela have progressively tightened over the past several years, targeting PDVSA specifically and making it nearly impossible for the company to access the global financial system through normal channels. USDT offers something the bolívar cannot: stability. Venezuela’s local currency has been ravaged by hyperinflation for years, making it essentially useless as a store of value.

Tether reportedly froze at least 41 wallets linked to Venezuelan sanctions evasion attempts by mid-2024. Then in January 2026, Tether executed a larger freeze totaling $182 million.

Why this matters beyond Venezuela For the broader crypto market, Venezuela’s USDT adoption creates a tension: it validates that stablecoins serve a genuine economic function in real commerce and commodity settlement, while handing ammunition to regulators who have argued that crypto enables sanctions evasion.

Traditional oil market intelligence, built on tracking tanker movements and banking flows, becomes less reliable when settlement happens on-chain through layered wallets. Circle’s USDC has positioned itself as the compliance-first alternative to Tether, but USDT’s dominance in emerging and sanctioned markets gives it a usage moat that is hard to replicate.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Stablecoin giant Tether reportedly invested $20 million in the Argentine neobank Ualá, as part of its broader push in Latin America.

The investment formed part of a $197 million equity funding round announced by Ualá in March and led by Allianz X, according to Bloomberg. Ualá disclosed Tether as a participant in the round at the time but did not reveal the size of its investment.

Cointelegraph contacted Tether for confirmation but had not received a response by publication.

Earlier in July, Tether announced a $20 million investment in Brazilian crypto exchange Mercado Bitcoin to support the expansion of its onchain infrastructure across Latin America.

In April, Tether led a $14 million Series A funding round for the Argentine crypto platform Belo, with participation from Titan Fund, The Venture City, Mindset Ventures, G2 and other existing investors.

Tether issues USDt (USDT), the world’s largest stablecoin, which had a market capitalization of $184.4 billion at the time of writing, according to CoinMarketCap.

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

The stablecoin cold war just got a lot less cold. Circle, the company behind USDC, banned a Tether-backed investment fund from its platform in late 2023 over concerns that the fund was engaging in trading activity designed to manipulate markets in favor of Circle’s biggest rival.

The fund fought back with a $49 million arbitration claim. It lost. And now the details are public, offering a rare window into just how aggressively the two dominant stablecoin issuers are competing for control of a market worth roughly $307 billion.

What happened with Heka Funds The fund in question is Heka Funds, a Malta-based investment vehicle managed by London’s Abraxas Capital Management and backed by Tether. Circle determined that Heka’s trading patterns on its platform looked suspiciously like market manipulation, specifically the kind that would benefit Tether at Circle’s expense.

That’s exactly what Circle did. It banned Heka Funds from its platform entirely.

Advertisement

Heka didn’t take it quietly. The fund initiated arbitration proceedings in 2024, claiming Circle’s ban cost it $49 million in lost profits. The arbitrator disagreed. The ruling came down in Circle’s favor, validating the company’s decision to remove Heka from its ecosystem.

The stablecoin rivalry beneath the surface To understand why this matters, you need to understand the dynamics between USDC and USDT. These two tokens together dominate the stablecoin market, which sits at approximately $307 billion in total value. Tether’s USDT is the larger of the two by a significant margin, but Circle’s USDC has carved out its own substantial position, particularly among institutional users and in regulated markets.

Tether has long operated with a degree of opacity that has drawn scrutiny from regulators and skeptics alike. Circle, by contrast, has positioned itself as the compliance-first alternative, publishing regular attestation reports and pursuing a more transparent operational model.

Whether Tether itself had any direct involvement in or knowledge of Heka’s trading strategies remains unclear from the available details. But the optics alone, a Tether-backed entity accused of manipulating markets on Circle’s platform, tell you everything about the trust deficit between these two camps.

What this tells us about stablecoin oversight This dispute, which became public on July 14, highlights a broader shift in how stablecoin issuers police activity on their platforms.

Circle’s decision to ban Heka suggests that stablecoin issuers are now treating platform surveillance as a core business function. When your token’s credibility depends on maintaining a stable peg and market confidence, letting potentially manipulative trading slide is an existential risk.

What this means for investors The $49 million arbitration claim from Heka puts a number on the financial stakes. That figure represents what a single fund claims it lost from being cut off from Circle’s ecosystem.

Circle’s arbitration victory gives it a concrete data point to present to institutional allocators who care about governance and risk management.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Summary

Bolivia is evaluating a framework to integrate USDT into its national payments system as a regulated alternative to the boliviano and U.S. dollar.Crypto usage has spiked in the country, with transaction volumes hitting $430 million in the year after the central bank removed restrictions in mid-2024.Official adoption will require rigorous anti-money laundering controls because Bolivia remains on the Financial Action Task Force's grey list.Bolivia is considering adding Tether's USDT stablecoin to its national payments system, marking another step in the country's shift from banning crypto transactions to allowing regulated digital asset use.

Economy Minister José Gabriel Espinoza said at a press conference on Monday that the government is evaluating whether USDT could circulate alongside the boliviano, the country’s fiat currency, and the U.S. dollar.

The proposal remains under technical review and the government has not published implementation rules or granted the stablecoin legal-tender status, local news outlet La Razón reported.

Officials are developing a framework for banks, digital wallets and payment providers, according to Espinoza. Any rollout would require stronger anti-money laundering controls as Bolivia remains on the Financial Action Task Force's grey list, which subjects the country to increased monitoring over shortcomings in its financial crime regime.

The proposal comes amid a sharp rise in crypto adoption after Bolivia's central bank lifted restrictions on transactions in June 2024. Central bank data shows that crypto transaction volume climbed from $46.5 million in the first half of 2024 to $294 million during the same period last year. Total transaction volume rose 630% after restrictions were removed, the central bank has said.

Demand has increased as businesses and consumers look for alternatives to scarce U.S. dollars in the country. Bolivia ended its long-standing fixed dollar peg and moved to a floating exchange rate earlier this year.

State energy company YPFB announced plans last year to use crypto for energy imports, while Bolivia's central bank has also looked to El Salvador for help with its crypto regulatory framework.

State-controlled Banco Unión and its Yasta wallet start letting customers buy USDT through EFY Finance in April for international payments and remittances.

China is ramping up its efforts to combat cryptocurrency-related crime, with institutions and prosecutors outlining new frameworks for prosecution and asset disposal as police continue to break up large money laundering rings.

Prosecutors seek new rules for crypto money laundering casesAn opinion article published in the Procuratorate Daily, the official newspaper of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, presents a detailed approach to tackling crypto-related money laundering in China. Authored by two district prosecutors from Hunan province and a university law professor, the article suggests that prosecutors often rely on broad “concealment” charges, as China’s existing money-laundering laws cover only seven predicate crimes, leaving crypto cases in a legal grey area.

The authors recommend adopting a “double investigation of one case” approach. This would involve screening every underlying crime for possible crypto-related laundering and mapping the flow of any digital assets involved. This proposal builds on a 2024 judicial interpretation from China’s Supreme People’s Court, which treats virtual-asset transactions used for moving criminal proceeds as a form of laundering.

To strengthen the evidentiary process, the article introduces the idea of using “blockchain data self-verification.” Under this principle, on-chain records that match public block explorer data would be regarded as legitimate unless proven otherwise. Reports from blockchain analytics companies, including fund tracing and address clustering, would serve as expert evidence. The article also supports the idea that circumstantial and fragmentary evidence can be acceptable if it presents a coherent narrative, even when not every coin is traced to its origin.

They propose that blockchain data, when verified using on-chain hash values and public explorers, should be assumed genuine unless disputed, while reports from blockchain analytics firms could serve as expert evidence in court.

Mini dictionary: Supreme People’s Procuratorate — This is China’s highest national agency responsible for legal prosecution and investigation of criminal offenses.

The article further addresses the challenge authorities face after seizing crypto assets. With China’s ban on trading, there is no legal method to convert seized tokens to fiat currency, leaving large sums effectively stranded.

Authorities push for official platform to manage seized cryptocurrenciesTo resolve the dilemma of disposing of seized digital assets, the article calls for the creation of a national platform dedicated to the custody and sale of confiscated cryptocurrencies through officially recognized channels, such as directed auctions. This system would rely on an expert committee to value assets accurately using both on-chain data and global exchange prices, and would potentially support cross-border cooperation to trace and recover assets moved abroad.

Currently, local government agencies have circumvented domestic trading bans by discreetly liquidating seized cryptocurrencies through external partners operating in overseas markets, a process previously documented by international agencies.

In 2024 alone, China’s prosecution authorities charged over 3,000 individuals with crypto-related money laundering activities, highlighting the scale of the issue and the urgency for legal reform.

China intensifies crackdown on yuan stablecoins and RWA tokenizationIn a separate move, China’s central bank and nine regulatory agencies issued a joint directive reaffirming the country’s tough stance against crypto activity. The notice, published on Friday, prohibits the creation of any yuan-linked stablecoin without regulatory approval and classifies most projects involving the tokenization of real-world assets as illegal. The statement warns that virtual currencies, stablecoins, and tokenized assets present systemic dangers to financial stability, repeating that cryptocurrencies have no status as legal tender and that trading, issuance, and brokerage activities tied to them are prohibited.

The new notice from China’s central bank, together with other regulators, explicitly bans the issuance of unapproved yuan-backed stablecoins and categorizes most real-world asset tokenization as unlawful.

Chinese police arrest group in $1.7 billion Tether laundering caseChinese law enforcement in Tonglio, a city in Inner Mongolia, announced the arrest of 63 suspects linked to a major Tether-based money laundering network. Authorities began their investigation when they detected unexplained deposits exceeding 10 million yuan at a local bank, prompting anti-money laundering procedures. Subsequent raids resulted in the seizure of 130 million yuan in cash and payment cards potentially connected to the laundering operations.

According to the official statement, the criminal group laundered around $1.7 billion in cryptocurrency, mostly using the Tether (USDT) stablecoin. Tether is a widely used US dollar-pegged digital asset, often used for cross-border transactions but also attracting scrutiny because of its utility in illicit activities.

Mini dictionary: Tether (USDT) — A leading stablecoin designed to maintain a 1-to-1 value with the US dollar, facilitating easy exchange and transfer of value across digital platforms.

Despite banning cryptocurrency trading and mining in 2021, China remains a global hotspot for crypto-based money laundering. Chainalysis, a blockchain analytics firm, estimates that Chinese-language laundering networks processed $16 billion worth of cryptocurrency in 2025 and now account for about 20% of global crypto money laundering. The company’s analysis links the continued prominence of such networks to China’s strict capital controls, as wealthy individuals looking to move assets offshore indirectly fuel laundering operations that also serve international crime syndicates.

YearEstimated Laundered Crypto AmountMajor Enforcement Action2022$1.7 billionMajor ring dismantled in China2024Over $1.7 billion63 suspects arrested, Mongolian city case2025 (projection)$16 billionChinese-language networks process 20% of global totalDisclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

Thailand’s central bank is considering measures requiring anyone depositing 5 million baht ($150,000) or more in cash to prove the origin of the funds. 

This is part of a fourth-quarter push that also puts Tether (USDT) transactions under a joint audit with securities regulators.

Why Thailand Is Watching USDTBank of Thailand (BOT) Governor Vitai Ratanakorn framed the measures as a strike against the country’s grey economy. The push, reported by Thansettakij, extends the central bank’s grey-money campaign to digital assets. 

Vitai said in January that roughly 40% of USDT sellers on local platforms were foreigners. He argued they should not be operating in Thailand.

The BOT is now working with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to review unusually high-volume USDT trading.  Authorities have identified transactions that may indicate disclosure avoidance or the movement of funds outside standard financial channels. 

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens 

Cash and Bullion Rules TightenThe deposit rule complements checks already applied to large withdrawals. Since April, cash withdrawals above 5 million baht have faced enhanced due diligence. The value of large cash withdrawals has since fallen 35%.

The BOT is reviewing the legal framework before issuing the deposit requirements. 

“In addition, it is considering measures for high-value banknote exchanges — such as bringing in large quantities of 1,000-baht notes to exchange for 100- or 500-baht notes — which may require an explanation of the reason for the transaction,” the report read.

In addition, the BOT has tightened oversight of gold trading to limit its impact on the baht and detect suspicious activity. 

“The measures we are implementing are not short-term fixes; they require the continuous deployment of multiple parallel strategies,” Governor Vitai said.

The coming quarter will test how far the BOT can extend its reach.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

Crypto whales are accumulating gold again just as spot prices slide. Asset manager Abraxas Capital pulled millions in Tether Gold (XAUT) off exchanges this week, and on-chain data suggests it is not acting alone.

The whale activity comes as gold posts mixed results in July. Prices climbed early in the month, then slipped as US-Iran tensions escalated.

Gold’s Volatility Pushes Traders On-ChainAccording to Onchain Lens, investment firm Abraxas Capital withdrew approximately 3,931 XAUT, worth around $15.96 million, from four major exchanges. 

The transfers included 760.244 XAUT ($3.09 million) from Bitfinex, 940.207 XAUT ($3.82 million) from OKX, 230 XAUT ($934,000) from Bybit, and 2,001 XAUT ($8.12 million) from Binance.

Lookonchain also reported that a whale wallet identified as 0xD20E resumed accumulating XAUT after a three-year hiatus. Over the past three days, the wallet withdrew 953 XAUT, valued at roughly $3.93 million, from Binance.

The broader exchange flow data reinforces the trend. Nansen data showed XAUT recorded $17.4 million in net exchange outflows over the past 24 hours, around 16 times its average daily level.

The momentum has also persisted over a longer period. Over the past seven days, XAUT registered net outflows of $34.1 million, more than four times its typical weekly pace.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

XAUT Exchange Outflows By Window, Source: BeInCrypto/NansenSuch sustained exchange withdrawals are generally viewed as a sign of accumulation, as investors moving tokens into self-custody are typically positioning for longer-term holding rather than immediate trading.

The trend is not limited to XAUT. As previously reported by BeInCrypto, Paxos Gold (PAXG) has also posted notable net exchange outflows, suggesting rising demand across tokenized gold assets.

Not All Signals Point UpThe picture is not one-sided. Nansen data shows a meaningful distribution alongside the buying. One holder sold about 2,900 XAUT in 24 hours, worth roughly $11.8 million. Another cut 757 tokens over the same period.

Top XAUT Holders 30-day Net Change, Source: BeInCrypto/NansenTwo of the largest tracked wallets, 0x77134c and 0x28c6c0, each shed more than 5,000 XAUT over 30 days. That selling tempers the bullish read on outflows.

Tether Gold tracks physical bullion, so its direction likely follows spot prices. The next Federal Reserve signal and geopolitical developments may decide whether whale buying holds.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

Strike’s new volatility-proof Bitcoin loans shift price risk from borrowers onto the lender’s capital providers. Tether supplies the $2.1 billion credit facility behind the program and co-designed the loan structure itself. A proposed merger would fold Strike, Twenty One Capital, and miner Elektron Energy into one Tether-linked platform. The combined stack covers every core banking function except the safety net regulated banks carry. The headline this week belongs to Strike. On July 7 the company launched Bitcoin-backed loans with no margin calls and no price liquidations, promising that collateral stays untouched no matter how far Bitcoin falls, as long as borrowers keep paying. Most coverage stopped there. The more consequential story sits one layer down, with the entity actually carrying the risk. A loan that never liquidates on price means somebody holds undercollateralized debt through every drawdown, and that somebody, directly and indirectly, is Tether. The merger proposal from April read as corporate maneuvering at the time. Yesterday’s launch is what it looks like in production: a stablecoin issuer assembling deposits, credit, energy, mining, and capital markets into a working bank for the Bitcoin economy. No banking license. No central bank behind it. No deposit insurance in front of it.

The loan Strike sells, the risk Tether keeps Strike’s volatility-proof structure only works with deep pockets behind it. A borrower posts $100,000 in BTC at the product’s 45% loan-to-value cap and takes $45,000 in cash. If Bitcoin then falls 60% and stays there, the collateral covers about $40,000 against a $45,000 debt. A conventional crypto lender would have sold at 85% LTV. This one waits, holding the shortfall until repayment or maturity.

That patience is a balance-sheet luxury, and the balance sheet providing it is not Strike’s. Jack Mallers announced a $2.1 billion credit facility that he said gives the company capacity to meet demand at any order size, and Tether co-developed the volatility-proof loan structure itself. Even Strike’s proof-of-reserves system, which lets borrowers verify their collateral at a segregated on-chain address, was built with Tether’s help. Strike originates and services. Tether underwrites the tail risk. Traditional finance has a name for this division of labor: the originator model, the same architecture mortgage banks run with their warehouse lenders.

Six of seven banking functions, already in place Take the classic functions of a commercial bank and check them against what Tether now touches. The gaps are few.

Banking function Tether’s version Scale Deposits USDT in circulation Largest stablecoin by supply Lending Own CeFi loan book + Strike credit facility $2.1B facility; top-3 CeFi lender Payments & custody Strike (proposed merger) 95+ countries Reserves / treasury Twenty One Capital BTC treasury Top-tier corporate BTC holder Physical infrastructure Elektron Energy mining (proposed merger) ~50 EH/s, ~5% of network hashrate Capital markets Planned securitization arm Loan-book and mining revenue debt Lender of last resort None – Tether Investments published a proposal to merge Twenty One Capital with Strike and Elektron Energy, a mining operator managing roughly 50 EH/s, about 5% of Bitcoin’s network hashrate, into a single listed platform integrating treasury holdings, mining, financial services, lending, and capital markets. Mallers endorsed it from the stage at Bitcoin 2026. “Simply put, I think it’s a great idea,” he said, adding that his founding goal was always a Bitcoin company rather than a payments app.

Terms and timelines remain undisclosed, but the machinery is moving: in June, Tether designated an additional independent director to XXI’s board to restore the audit committee to SEC and NYSE independence standards, the kind of housekeeping that precedes a transaction, not one that follows a dead deal.

Mallers described an operation built around loan-book securitization, mining revenue securitization, Bitcoin-backed debt, and structured products. Packaging loans into securities and selling them onward is how banks recycle capital and lend beyond their own balance sheets. Nobody in crypto has run that machine at size. A merged Tether-Strike entity would be the first with both the origination volume and the distribution to try.

Three lenders now hold 89% of a market that used to have ten The crypto credit market recovered from 2022 with far fewer players. According to Galaxy Research data, the three largest centralized lenders, Tether among them alongside Galaxy and Ledn, hold combined loan books of $9.9 billion, close to 89% of the CeFi lending market. Tether sits at the top of that group with its own book, and now also funds the most aggressive product structure in the industry through Strike.

The pre-collapse era looked different. Celsius, BlockFi, Voyager, and Genesis competed for the same borrowers, and when they fell, the survivors absorbed the clients and the market kept functioning. The 2026 market has no such redundancy. One dominant creditor now stands behind deposits (USDT), wholesale credit (the Strike facility), and soon, if the merger completes, a meaningful slice of the mining hardware securing the network itself. Bank supervisors have a term for an institution whose failure would cascade through every layer of its system. Crypto has quietly grown one without anyone signing off on the designation.

To be fair to the other side of the ledger: Tether reports billions in annual profit from reserve yields, which gives it more loss-absorbing capacity than any pre-2022 crypto lender ever had. The company can genuinely afford to sit on underwater loans through a bear market. That is exactly what makes the no-liquidation promise credible today. It is also what makes the arrangement fragile in the one scenario that counts. A shock hitting Tether itself, whether from reserves, regulation, or redemption pressure, would now propagate simultaneously into stablecoin markets, the CeFi loan book, Strike’s borrowers, and a mining fleet. Banks carry deposit insurance and central bank liquidity lines for precisely this correlation problem. This structure carries neither.

Ledn and Unchained now need a $2 billion backstop of their own For borrowers, none of this is visible. Loans get approved, Bitcoin stays put, and the plumbing behind the $2.1 billion never surfaces in the app. The market feels it differently. Competing lenders like Ledn and Unchained still run LTV-triggered liquidation models, and matching Strike’s no-liquidation terms would require a capital partner willing to eat drawdowns measured in years, not hours. Few candidates exist. The likely outcome is consolidation around whoever has the largest balance sheet, which is the opposite of what a market still scarred by 2022 says it wants.

Bitcoin’s spot price mechanics change too. Forced liquidations have amplified every major sell-off since 2018 by dumping collateral onto exchanges at the worst possible moment. Loans that never sell on price remove one of those feedback loops. The selling pressure does not vanish; it converts into credit exposure sitting on Tether-linked balance sheets, waiting.

The open question lands on regulators’ desks, not traders’ screens. U.S. stablecoin legislation focused on reserve quality and redemption rights, not on what an issuer’s investment arm does with its profits. Lending billions against volatile collateral through affiliated platforms sits outside that perimeter entirely, and European supervisors under MiCA face the same gap. The proposed merger, which would put Elektron founder Raphael Zagury in the president’s seat of a listed entity combining all these pieces, will eventually force a decision: at what point does the Bitcoin economy’s largest private creditor become subject to something resembling bank supervision, and who moves first, Washington or Brussels?

Tether, the company behind USDT, is preparing to issue the stablecoin natively on Bitcoin through the RGB protocol version v0.11.1. Deployed by the UTEXO software lab, USDT is set to return to the chain where it first launched in 2014 via the Omni-Mastercoin Layer. 

UTEXO, the company leading the commercial rollout, has positioned itself as the issuer and distributor of this Bitcoin-native USDT in partnership with Tether.  “Finally, after eight years of development—if not more—we are the company that is launching USDT over Bitcoin with strong support from Tether,” said Viktor Ihnatiuk, UTEXO co-founder, in an exclusive interview with Bitcoin Magazine. 

The RGB protocol combines its novel client-side validation with the Lightning network for instant, private settlements, while anchoring security to Bitcoin’s UTXO model. Users can expect to be able to handle USDT on native Bitcoin addresses as well as send and receive it over the Lightning network with compatible wallets. 

The RGB protocol on Bitcoin also offers significant privacy features to USDT users as the asset benefits from Bitcoin’s UTXO model, which standardizes fresh addresses for every transaction compared to the account-based address reused commonly in EVM blockchains like Tron, Ethereum or Solana. Address reuse is the first mistake of onchain privacy, yet most altcoins built their interfaces to reuse addresses, despite the risk it poses to users. RGB’s integration with the Lightning network further protects user privacy by moving USDT via the offchain payments network, which leaves few marks on the public blockchain. The deep integration with Tether also means that there are fewer middleman companies charging extra fees or collecting data. 

On the topic, Vktor emphasized that, “We built Utexo so that USDT could move on Bitcoin the way money is supposed to move: instantly, privately, with no surprises on costs. Our partners integrate our API once and can route USDT on the most resilient open network ever built, with full control over cost structure.”

UTEXO vs TRON UTEXO emerged from a joint venture involving Viktor’s Boosty Venture Studio, Fulgur Ventures, and Tether Investments. The goal was straightforward: bring RGB to mainnet after years of delays under prior development teams. The protocol had been in active development since at least 2016, but failed to be ready for the 2017 bull market, giving the TRON blockchain dominance over USDT volume and usage throughout the developing world, a dominance which it still retains. 

UTEXO of specifically building “the last mile” of software needed for wide USDT deployment across the Bitcoin ecosystem, which includes a software development kit, APIs, mid-level protocols, UI design work and even a mint bridge that is live today at mint.utexo.com. This bridge lets users move USDT across popular blockchains with “deterministic low fees” and no middlemen thanks to its direct integration with Tether as the primary mint. The RGB protocol layer was developed by Bitfinex R&D Strategist Federico Tenga.

“Right now if you want to swap USDT to Bitcoin you need to pay high fees for all these wallets who charge you a one percent wallet fee plus a swap provider charge of one percent plus, and you have slippage one percent as well, so you pay three percent, and also you wait forever until the swap happens” Viktor told Bitcoin Magazine, adding that; “with USDT and Bitcoin over Lightning, for the first time you have two main assets on one chain, you can swap instantly without any slippage. You can swap decentralized USDT to Bitcoin and back on-chain. The price is almost the same as spot markets in Binance.”

Networks like Tron that are primarily used to move USDT also add extra fees, swap commissions and friction to the user experience. They require a different address type, with fees paid in an asset like TRX, which is only ever used to move the stablecoin. With most of the monetary volume in the crypto market concentrated in Bitcoin and Tether, having to buy an altcoin just to pay fees ends up feeling like red tape. 

Bitcoin, as the payment rails of USDT, also comes with blockchain levels of security that other chains simply can not offer. While USDT will always be fundamentally centralized in Tether as a corporation, the rails can also add risk, for example, if a contentious fork occurs or major bugs are found on novel blockchain systems. Bitcoin, being the oldest and most conservative blockchain, delivers a quality assurance of sorts that can not be matched by other chains. 

RGB traces its roots to Peter Todd’s single-use seals back in 2014 and was formalized in 2016 by Giacomo Zucco and Riccardo Casatta. The RGB acronym, originally derived from “Riccardo Giacomo Bitcoin,” was later rebranded “Really Good Bitcoin”. Tether explored the protocol early but faced delays with the previous team. Had RGB shipped on schedule around 2019, the stablecoin landscape and broader DeFi industry might have developed differently around Bitcoin’s UTXO model instead of Ethereum’s account-based system.

As such, bringing USDT back to Bitcoin is a core motivation for UTEXO. Viktor minced no words on the matter: “For the first time in eight years or nine years, USDT is coming back home. We have no chance to fail. If we fail, no one will think about Bitcoin as a settlement layer anymore.”

USDT on Bitcoin via RGB is expected to be launched within weeks, possibly this July, with wallets like Tether Wallet among others announcing support, and exchanges across the world announcing integrations.

Former Tether chief investment officer Richard Heathcote is seeking to sell part of his 1.26% stake in the stablecoin issuer, according to a Bloomberg report citing people familiar with the matter.

Heathcote stepped down as Tether's chief investment officer in March to take an advisory role after overseeing the stablecoin issuer's investment portfolio. Bloomberg reported the planned sale involves only part of his 1.26% ownership stake.

Tether issues USDt (USDT), the world's largest stablecoin by market capitalization. With a circulating supply of roughly $184 billion, USDT accounts for roughly 59% of the stablecoin market, according to DefiLlama data.

The planned sale could offer a rare look at ownership in Tether, which remains privately held despite becoming one of the crypto industry's most profitable companies.

The sale also comes as Tether navigates regulatory pressure in Europe. USDT has been delisted by a growing number of MiCA-authorized platforms after Tether opted not to comply with the European Union's crypto framework, with Revolut announcing this month that it will remove the stablecoin from its platform.

Crypto companies weigh IPOs While Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino has said outright that the stablecoin issuer does not need to go public, several other crypto companies are reportedly mulling initial public offerings (IPOs).

Kraken has taken several steps toward a public listing. Fortune reported in September 2025 that the crypto exchange had raised $500 million at a $15 billion valuation, fueling expectations that the exchange was preparing for an IPO.

Source: Paolo Ardoino

The company also announced it had confidentially filed a draft registration statement with the US Securities and Exchange Commission for a proposed initial public offering in November 2025. However, Bloomberg later reported that the IPO plans could be pushed back until 2027 following layoffs tied to the company's expanding use of artificial intelligence.

South Korean crypto exchange Bithumb also announced in April that it is delaying its IPO until after 2028 as it works to strengthen its accounting policies and internal controls following earlier regulatory setbacks.

Magazine: The end of anonymity? AI could unmask crypto’s hidden identities

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

Tether has launched Alloy, a synthetic dollar product backed by Tether Gold, in a move that pushes the stablecoin issuer further beyond simple dollar tokens.

For more details, visit the official Tether platform.

TL;DR Tether has introduced Alloy and its aUSDT synthetic dollar product.The product is backed by Tether Gold (XAUt) rather than traditional cash reserves.The launch shows stablecoin design expanding into new forms of collateral. Most stablecoin stories are about whether a token is backed by dollars, Treasuries, or bank deposits. Alloy is different. It is designed around over-collateralization with liquid gold exposure, creating a synthetic dollar instrument rather than another straightforward fiat-backed token.

Why Gold-Backed Dollars Are Interesting Tether already dominates the conventional stablecoin market with USDT. Alloy suggests the company wants to build a wider collateral platform, where users can hold exposure that behaves like a dollar product while being backed by tokenized gold.

That is a more complex promise than a standard stablecoin. It introduces collateral-price dynamics, liquidation mechanics, and a different risk profile. It also shows why stablecoin issuers are becoming more like financial infrastructure companies than single-product crypto firms.

The Risk Is In The Design The appeal is clear: users get a dollar-denominated asset tied to gold collateral, potentially blending the familiarity of stablecoin units with a different reserve base. The caution is just as clear. Synthetic products need users to understand how collateral, redemptions, and market stress interact.

For Tether, Alloy is a way to test how far its brand can stretch. USDT is the liquidity engine. XAUt is the commodity-backed asset. aUSDT tries to connect the two into something more programmable. Whether traders embrace it will depend less on the headline and more on how it behaves when markets are not calm.

This article is based on information from Tether.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

The fintech giant of Europe, Revolut, has announced the delisting of Tether’s USDT stablecoin. This move hinges on regulatory changes under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) framework affecting the crypto industry.

Revolut Moves To Delist Tether’s USDT The company has sent out emails to users with a timeline to sell their USDT before it is withdrawn from eligible accounts.

As explained in the notice, Revolut said, “We’re delisting USDT from our crypto offering.” It also warned users that “From 31 August 2026 12:00 PM GMT, you’ll no longer be able to hold USDT in your Revolut account.”

It will be rolled out in phases. Customers will be able to keep buying USDT until July 6th. After 30th July, the new USDT deposits will not be accepted. Users will continue to be able to sell their tokens or send them to supported external crypto wallets until Aug. 31.

Revolut also urged customers to “Review your holdings before 31 August 2026 12:00 PM GMT.” This provides a couple of weeks for them to consider their options.

If you still have USDT in eligible accounts at the end of the deadline, they will no longer be in crypto. According to Revolut’s crypto delisting policy, any remaining balance will be automatically converted to the base currency that the account is denominated in at the market price of USDT when the delisting is activated.

Tether’s MiCA License Setback Revolut’s decision comes in response to stricter implementation of EU’s MiCA regulations. Stablecoin issuers and crypto services in the bloc must now adhere to new licensing, reserve, disclosure and supervisory requirements.

Tether has not been granted a MiCA licence for USDT. Previously, Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino had said that the framework was not designed for the world’s largest stablecoin due to MiCA’s requirement for reserves. This raised questions around the stablecoin reserve composition, liquidity management, and redemption risks.

Following the July 1st enforcement date of MiCA, Revolut joins the growing list of platforms restricting customers’ access to USDT in Europe. Also, it’s important to note that these restrictions will only affect notified users of Revolut. Hence, it will not impact on the availability of USDT in the jurisdictions in which the stablecoin remains supported.

If you’re looking for decentralized futures trading, visit our page on Perp DEXs.

The US Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned 134 cryptocurrency wallet addresses identified as belonging to ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K), which has been a Specially Designated Global Terrorist since September 2015.

The wallet addresses were added to the OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list on Wednesday, which includes individuals, entities and digital asset addresses linked to terrorism, narcotics trafficking and other illicit activity.

Stablecoin issuer Tether has frozen the balances associated with 131 Tron addresses, while the remaining three sanctioned addresses were on the Monero network, blockchain forensics company Chainalysis said in a Wednesday report.

The development comes over a week after the OFAC’s previous round of sanctions against ISIS-supporting financiers using cryptocurrency. On June 22, the OFAC sanctioned three individuals and six entities across Europe, the Middle East and West Africa, including Syria-based MSB Bitcoin Xchange and Turkish MSB Spider.

OFAC said the previous round of sanctions targeted “key facilitators who enable ISIS to move funds among its regional affiliates.”

OFAC update to SDN list, new wallets included. Source: OFAC

131 wallets linked to ISIS-K received $1.4 million in donationsISIS-K has historically solicited crypto through donation campaigns on various websites and messaging platforms, Chainalysis said.

The report said that the 131 Tron addresses in the latest round of sanctions received over $1.4 million in crypto donations since 2023 and sent over $880,000.

Network of ISIS-K funding entities sanctioned by OFAC. Source: Chainalysis

Chainalysis identified multiple such donation addresses used by the group on Tron, Monero and the Bitcoin network. It found significant exposure to mainstream services, including some wallets that sent funds to Syria-based cryptocurrency exchanges.

Blockchain analytics tools are playing an increasingly prominent role in financial sanctions targeting illicit activity.

Earlier in April, blockchain intelligence company TRM Labs said that onchain evidence was key to securing the conviction of three individuals for terrorism financing in Indonesia in 2024 and 2025.

“Indonesian courts have demonstrated that cryptocurrency evidence — wallet addresses, transaction histories, on-chain flows — is not only admissible but can anchor a terrorism financing prosecution,” TRM said in a statement.

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

Tomorrow marks the end of USDT’s run on regulated European crypto platforms. July 1, 2026, is the hard deadline for the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, and Tether, the issuer of the world’s largest stablecoin with a market capitalization between $175 billion and $186 billion, never bothered to apply for authorization.

MiCA requires stablecoin issuers to obtain e-money token authorization to operate within the European Economic Area. Without it, exchanges can’t legally offer the token to EEA clients.

Tether has not applied for MiCA authorization as of June 2026, a decision that aligns with its broader posture of focusing on markets outside Europe rather than complying with the bloc’s stringent bank reserve mandates.

Advertisement

Coinbase Europe delisted USDT back in December 2024. Crypto.com followed in January 2025. Binance’s EEA entity restricted USDT trading pairs in March 2025. Major platforms have already started converting or limiting USDT balances for their European users in anticipation of the final deadline.

Tether also discontinued its euro-denominated stablecoin, EURT, back in 2024, walking away from the European market entirely.

Circle’s USDC and EURC tokens have secured MiCA compliance and remain available across EU-licensed platforms, making Circle’s products the default stablecoin option on regulated exchanges for European traders.

A retail investor using Binance’s European entity will need to switch to USDC or another authorized alternative. A DeFi user interacting directly with smart contracts through a self-custody wallet can keep using USDT, as the regulation targets service providers, not the token itself. No legal actions against Tether itself have been reported in connection with MiCA compliance.

USDT has long been the dominant trading pair denomination across crypto markets globally. When European platforms remove it, trading volumes on those platforms will shift to USDC-denominated pairs or other compliant alternatives.

Tether’s calculus appears to be that the cost of MiCA compliance, particularly the reserve requirements mandating funds be held in European banks, outweighs the revenue from European platform activity. Institutional players and regulated funds operating within the EEA don’t have the option of routing around compliance requirements by switching to non-custodial wallets, making USDC the only compliant option for that segment of the market.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Ukraine has placed more than $8.3 million in seized crypto under state management, the first time the country has moved confiscated digital assets into a government-controlled wallet.

The National Agency for Finding, Tracing, and Management of Assets, known as ARMA, received the funds from wallets tied to an alleged member of an international hacking group.

Seized Crypto from an International Hacking CaseThe holding is Tether (USDT), the largest stablecoin, valued at over 372 million Ukrainian hryvnias at the time of the transfer, according to prosecutors.

Investigators say the group attacked people and companies across Europe and the United States. The case reflects a rise in stablecoin-driven crypto crime.

The attackers stole confidential data, demanded ransom payments, and laundered the money in Ukraine through real estate and cars.

Authorities estimate the network caused more than $100 million in damage. The pattern mirrors other crypto laundering networks that ended in multiple arrests.

Four suspects, including the alleged organizer, remain in custody. Total seizures in the case topped $11.1 million, covering homes, apartments, vehicles, and cash.

What State Custody Means for the FundsUntil now, crypto seized in Ukrainian cases sat frozen, with no agency actively holding or moving it. The transfer gives ARMA direct control of the wallet.

A 2025 reform law overhauled how ARMA manages seized property, adding independent audits and tighter oversight. The change was a condition of hundreds of millions of euros in European Union support.

The step stops short of confiscation, which requires a court conviction. For now, the agency holds the assets rather than owning them.

USDT sits near its dollar peg, trading close to $1. That gives ARMA a relatively stable asset to manage, hold, or eventually sell.

USDT Near Its Dollar Peg. Source: BeInCryptoA stablecoin avoids the price swings tied to bitcoin, making the holding easier to value. But USDT is centrally controlled, and Tether can freeze tokens at law enforcement requests.

Under Economic Fury, @USTreasury will continue to systematically degrade Tehran’s ability to generate, move, and repatriate funds.

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control is sanctioning multiple wallets tied to Iran — resulting in the freeze of $344 million in…

— Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) April 24, 2026 Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

What to do with seized crypto has split governments. The United States ordered forfeited Bitcoin into a strategic reserve it pledged not to sell. It treats confiscated coins as a long-term asset.

Germany took the opposite path, and critics still debate its seizure of Bitcoin sales after prices later climbed.

Ukraine has not said whether it will sell the USDT or hold it. That choice may shape how it treats future seizures, and whether seized tokens become state revenue.

Tether and Ledn have teamed up to bring tokenized gold into the crypto lending world. The partnership, announced on June 18, integrates Tether Gold (XAUT) into Ledn’s platform alongside Bitcoin and stablecoins, with gold-backed loans expected to follow later this year.

What the deal actually looks like From launch, Ledn users can trade and hold XAUT on the platform. Each XAUT token represents one fine troy ounce of gold, with 707,747 ounces currently backing the equivalent number of tokens in circulation.

Later in 2026, Ledn plans to roll out gold-backed loans denominated in Tether’s stablecoins. Borrowers will be able to choose between USDT and the newly launched USAT.

Advertisement

Ledn maintains a 1:1 collateral holding policy, meaning they don’t rehypothecate or lend out the collateral backing user deposits. Worth noting: the lending product won’t be available to residents of Canada or the EU.

The gold behind the token Tether manages a gold stockpile estimated between 140 and 154 metric tons, valued at roughly $23 billion. XAUT’s market cap recently surpassed $3 billion, making it one of the most significant commodity-backed tokens in crypto.

“Growing demand for solutions that combine long-term ownership with financial flexibility,” Paolo Ardoino said of the partnership’s rationale.

Why this matters for investors The crypto lending market has been rebuilding trust since the cascading failures of 2022, when firms like Celsius, BlockFi, and Voyager proved that aggressive rehypothecation and opaque risk management could crater an entire sector overnight. Ledn survived that purge, partly because of its conservative collateral approach.

Paxos Gold (PAXG) is XAUT’s closest competitor in the tokenized gold space, and it currently lacks a comparable lending integration.

The USAT launch, which will serve as one of the loan denomination options, suggests Tether is building an ecosystem where its various products feed into each other.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

In brief Tether’s USAT stablecoin is launching on the Celo blockchain, its first expansion beyond Ethereum. Google Cloud provides infrastructure support for the stablecoin's distribution system. A privacy-preserving faucet allows verified users to access USAT tokens through proof-of-humanity verification. Tether announced Tuesday that the USAT stablecoin is expanding to the Celo blockchain, an Ethereum layer-2 scaling network, marking the regulated digital dollar's first deployment beyond the Ethereum mainnet.

The launch will bring USAT—a stablecoin issued by Anchorage Digital and targeted at the U.S. market—to Celo, with Google Cloud providing infrastructure support alongside plans for the stablecoin to serve as a gas currency on the layer-2 network.

“More than 566 million people globally use USDT as a reliable way to access and move dollars, particularly in markets where traditional financial infrastructure falls short. Expanding USAT to Celo builds on that foundation by bringing regulated digital dollar infrastructure into one of the most active on-chain economies today,” said Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino, in a statement.

“This is how we continue to extend access to trusted, programmable money at a global scale,” he added. “What matters now is ensuring these systems are accessible in the environments where people are already transacting every day.”

Celo brings significant mobile reach through Opera MiniPay's 14 million wallet users globally. Celo co-founder and CEO Rene Reinsberg called the launch "a powerful validation of the infrastructure we've spent years building," highlighting Tether’s selection of Celo for its first layer-2 deployment for USAT following its initial January rollout on Ethereum.

The technical implementation includes a mainnet faucet system enabling verified users to access USAT through privacy-preserving proof-of-humanity verification developed with Self and Google Cloud. Following deployment, Celo governance will begin the process to enable USAT as a gas currency on the network.

“By bringing USAT to Opera MiniPay’s millions of mobile-first users, we are showing what the next generation of financial access looks like: trusted, compliant, and instantly available,” said Celo co-founder Rene Reinsberg, in a statement.

Deloitte performed the first USAT attestation report, released earlier this month, showing that the firm had $17.6 million in reserves—comprised of cash and U.S. Treasuries—backing about $17.5 million in tokens as of January 31.

Tether’s flagship USDT stablecoin, which leads the industry with an $184 million market cap, has never had a full independent audit from one of the “Big Four” accounting firms. However, last week, Tether said that it had signed one of the firms for an audit, but did not reveal which firm would do it. A subsequent Financial Times report said KPMG would conduct the audit.

Editor's note: This article was updated after publication for clarity.

Daily Debrief NewsletterStart every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.

Onyxcoin (XCN) climbed to a 3-month high after South Korean exchange Upbit confirmed it will list the token today.

The altcoin saw a notable price surge after the announcement, reaching an intraday peak of $0.0086, its strongest level since mid-January.

Onyxcoin (XCN) Price Jumps to January Highs Ahead of Upbit DebutAt press time, XCN was trading at $0.0077, up 64.48% since the announcement. The sharp rally has propelled the token to the top of the gainers’ list among the 1,000 largest cryptocurrencies by market capitalization on CoinGecko.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

Onyxcoin (XCN) Price Performance. Source: TradingViewThe daily trading volume also jumped 629% to reach $37 million. South Korea’s second-largest crypto exchange accounted 25.45% of the total volume. Historically, Upbit listings have produced sharp short-term price reactions in newly listed altcoins. 

Meanwhile, the exchange revealed that XCN trading will start at 16:00 Korean Standard Time (KST). The altcoin will be available to trade against two pairs: the Korean Won (KRW) and Tether (USDT).

“Please be sure to verify the network before depositing digital assets. Deposits and withdrawals through networks other than the one specified are not supported,” the notice read.

The exchange also noted that it will apply short-term trading restrictions. For the first five minutes after trading opens, traders will not be able to place buy orders, and sell orders priced more than 10% below the previous day’s closing value will be blocked.

Additionally, the exchange will permit only limit orders for approximately two hours after trading support begins. The temporary measures are meant to reduce volatility and ensure a fair, controlled start to XCN trading. 

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

Stablecoin issuer Tether is winding down Alloy by Tether and its gold-backed, overcollateralized aUSDT stablecoin after just two years to focus on products and areas with stronger demand. 

Tether announced its “strategic changes” on Wednesday following a review of user activity, market demand, and the company’s “broader priorities.”

Tether said it has decided to focus resources on areas where it is seeing “stronger user demand, deeper liquidity and broader long-term market opportunity,” including its gold-backed digital asset XAUT and other core products across its ecosystem.

While stablecoins remain Tether’s core business, the company has shown a growing interest in technology outside stablecoins. Its investments include Bitcoin mining infrastructure, artificial intelligence, cloud computing and robotics. Most recently, it led German tech company NEURA’s $1 billion funding round on June 11. 

Tether’s aUSDT is an overcollateralized derivative product built on top of XAUT using Ethereum smart contracts, which also reflects the demand for gold-backed and tokenized real-world assets. 

Alloy by Tether allowed users to deposit XAUT as collateral to mint aUSDT, with the value of XAUT locked exceeding the value of aUSDT issued, similar to how some stablecoins or synthetic dollars are created against crypto collateral in DeFi.

Users could borrow or mint against their XAUT holdings, letting them access dollar-like liquidity without selling their gold exposure. 

Alloy by Tether, announced in June 2024, has a current market capitalization of $1.2 million and is backed by 14.73 kilograms of gold worth around $2.2 million, according to Tether. 

Tether Gold remains popular The winding down will happen in phases, the first of which starts immediately by preventing the opening of new positions or the minting of new aUSDT. Users have three months to return their aUSDT and reclaim their XAUT until the cut-off date on Sept. 17.

XAUT remains popular with a market capitalization of $3 billion and is backed by 22,169 kilograms of physical gold, according to the company.

Its market cap surged earlier this year when gold prices hit an all-time high of just over $5,300 per ounce. However, it has retreated by 19% since then. 

Tether also bought a 12% stake in precious metals platform Gold.com for $150 million in February, with plans to integrate XAUT into the platform. 

Chinese yuan and euro stablecoins axed  Alloy by Tether is not the only product the company has shelved this year. 

In February, Tether announced it was discontinuing its Chinese yuan stablecoin, CNHT, citing “evolving market conditions, low interest in the product, and limited sustained community demand,” relative to other supported assets.

In November, it wound down its euro stablecoin, EURT, citing European regulatory issues and a focus on other initiatives such as Hadron, its asset tokenization platform launched in 2024. 

However, in May, Tether announced that it planned to launch a Georgian lari stablecoin, GELT, in cooperation with the government of Georgia. 

Magazine: The end of anon? AI could unmask crypto’s hidden identities

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

In recent months, Compound Finance has become one of the most popular lending platforms in the entire cryptoeconomy. Can it become the most popular?

To be sure, it remains to be seen if Compound will one day unseat Dai builders Maker atop the DeFi ecosystem, even if temporarily. Still, the project’s builders have recently been taking steps to make the “money lego” platform better and its users’ happier. That’s certainly a start.

For example, one of the bigger threads in Compound’s march toward maturity hit the limelight this week as attention gathered around its fresh audit. Specifically, the smart contract specialists at the OpenZeppelin project just published an audit on some of the Compound platform’s most important smart contracts.

⚠️ Here we present a summary of the @compoundfinance audit, including:

– System overview
– Privileged Roles and Future Direction
– Interest-free loans
– Counterproductive incentives
– Full audit reporthttps://t.co/OsGE6w3gnT

— OpenZeppelin (@OpenZeppelin) August 28, 2019

The good news? OpenZeppelin didn’t find any code issues that it deemed to be “critical.” But the auditors did find a series of lesser serious issues that helped the Ethereum community understand the fledgling Compound platform better.

Among these issues, one problem highlighted was that there are currently admin keys that could be used to compromise some of Compound’s tech.

Custodial Compound contracts pose a risk of *unsecured debt*

> cTokens used as collateral remain in the borrower's wallet but are non-transferable

> Admin could allow transfer of collateral cTokens… essentially enabling Compound debt to be undercollateralized https://t.co/jHzlwZgvQe

— Eva Beylin (@evabeylin) August 27, 2019

In response, Compound co-founder Robert Leshner later noted that the platform intended to evolve toward total decentralization.

“Absolutely; the FAQ […] and whitepaper […] are both very transparent about how the admin privileges work, and our goal to decentralize away from having an admin at all,” Leshner said on August 27th. 

Love ’em or hate ’em, Compound opening up their contracts for everyone to pick apart only works in their favor in the long run.

New Assets Being Voted In Like other cryptocurrency platforms, Compound only supports a select number of cryptocurrencies. But that number is about to get bigger.

That’s because Compound has opened up a voting period for its users to decide which digital assets they want to see on the platform next. The projects currently up for consideration include Maker, Tether, Decentraland, Huobi Token, Loom Network, Numeraire, OmiseGo, Paxos, and TrueUSD.

Voting has begun to select the next two Compound protocol assets!

????️ Make your selection: https://t.co/En6tOQffeo

???? Learn more: https://t.co/9uAeCVgcAD

⏱️ Voting is open for two weeks!

— Compound Labs (@compoundfinance) August 28, 2019

“Voting will last for 14 days, after which the 2 winning tokens will be added to the protocol following the creation of cToken integration contracts, successful security audits, and a determination of suitability,” the aforementioned Leshner said.

The Berlin Bump and Beyond Berlin Blockchain Week was earlier this month, and one of its events — ETHBerlin Zwei — saw no shortage of Hackathon projects built atop Compound. That gave the platform a tangible bump in usage.

According to tracker website DeFi Pulse, Compound has been steadily gaining on Maker’s DeFi dominance as of late. Of course, Maker still dominates more than 50 percent of the DeFi ecosystem, but Maker’s slice of the pie has been slowly declining as Compound has gained more attention.

2/ The total supply of DAI in the market has lowered around $14M in the last 90d thanks in part to CDPs moving to Compound and tools like @InstaDApp's Bridge. And so, the stability fee is starting to lower as a result. [TVL charts included for reference. Note difference in scale] pic.twitter.com/sckUjnPvL3

— DeFi Pulse (@defipulse) August 30, 2019

It’s not that one is more impressive than the other, rather that both are at the top of DeFi right now and Compound is notably gaining steam. With that said, Maker and Compound are far from enemies as the DeFi Pulse team has explained:

“For the time being, they appear to have a symbiotic relationship. Maker prints the DAI, Compound creates more demand for DAI in the market.”

Dharma Pivots to Compound On August 29th, Dharma — a top 10 DeFi project at present — announced that it was relaunching its cryptocurrency services upon having phased out its initial offering.

The twist? Dharma’s new services will rely on Compound’s liquidity pools. In moving away from crypto lending, the project’s first offering after the relaunch will be a savings product.

“Working with Compound allows Dharma to focus on the parts of the business which they do best, which in my view include design, product, and user experience, and instead outsource part of the stack,” Autonomous Partners founder and Dharma investor Arianna Simpson said on the news.

William M. Peaster

William M. Peaster is a professional writer and editor who specializes in the Ethereum, Dai, and Bitcoin beats in the cryptoeconomy. He's appeared in Blockonomi, Binance Academy, Bitsonline, and more. He enjoys tracking smart contracts, DAOs, dApps, and the Lightning Network. He's learning Solidity, too! Contact him on Telegram at @wmpeaster