Tether blacklist delay allowed $78M in illicit USDT transfers: Report
A lag in Tether’s wallet blacklisting process allowed over $78 million in illicit funds to be moved before enforcement actions took effect, according to a new report from blockchain compliance company AMLBot.
Tether’s address blacklisting becomes effective only after a considerable delay from when the process is initiated on Ethereum and Tron, according the report published May 15.
“This delay originates from Tether’s multisignature contract setup on both Tron and Ethereum, transforming what should be an immediate compliance action into a window of opportunity for illicit actors,“ the report reads.
Tether’s blacklisting procedure is a multi-step process with a first transaction effectively warning of the upcoming blacklisting. First, a Tether administrator multisignature transaction submits a pending call to “addBlackList” on the USDT-TRC20 contract.
This results in a public “submission” of the target address as a blacklist candidate. This is followed by a second multisignature transaction confirming the submission, resulting in an “AddedBlackList” emission, making the blacklisting effective.
Related: Tether, Tron and TRM Labs jointly froze $126M USDT in 2024
A warning on incoming blacklisting
In one example shared with Cointelegraph, an onchain transaction submitting a Tron address as a blacklist candidate took place at 11:10:12 UTC. The second transaction that actually enforced the action did not occur until 11:54:51 UTC on the same day, a 44-minute delay.
In practice, this delay can be treated by owners of USDt about to be blacklisted as a notice to move their assets to avoid them being frozen. The report stated:
“This delay between a freeze request and its on-chain execution creates a critical attack window, allowing malicious actors to front-run enforcement and move or launder funds before the freeze takes effect.“
The report says that “for blockchain-savvy attackers, these delays are golden.” By tracking Tether’s calls in real time, a fraudster can be instantly alerted that their address is being targeted. When asked by Cointelegraph whether the delay is a technical limitation or just a delay in the actions of a multisignature wallet key holder, AMLBot researchers said that they cannot determine it without knowledge of Tether’s internal procedures.
“Tether operates on public blockchains, where all activity is visible — unlike fiat currencies that move in secret through traditional banks. This transparency allows Tether, in collaboration with over 255 law enforcement agencies across 55 countries, to track, trace, and freeze illicit funds faster than most realize.“
“We are actively refining this process to work to eliminate any potential advantage for bad actors. If you think you can use Tether to move illicit funds, think again.“
Related: Tether stablecoin issuer and Tron launch financial crime unit
Not just theoretical
AMLBot said its data shows that over $28.5 million in USDT was withdrawn during the delay between the two transactions on the Ethereum blockchain. This amount of freeze avoidance occurred between Nov. 28, 2017, and May 12, 2025. The average amount moved during the delay exceeded $365,000.
Similarly, $49.6 million was reportedly withdrawn during freeze delay windows on the Tron blockchain, resulting in a total on Ethereum and Tron of $78.1 million. Exploiting this delay on Tron is not particularly rare, according to AMLBot:
“170 out of 3,480 wallets (4.88%) on Tron blockchain exploited the lag before getting blacklisted. Each of these wallets made 2–3 transfers during the delay, withdrawing: Average: $291,970.“
Tether has previously promoted its ability to freeze assets as a compliance feature. In 2024, Tether, Tron, and analytics firm TRM Labs cooperated to freeze over $126 million in USDT linked to illicit activity.
Still, the AMLBot report raises questions about the effectiveness and speed of those enforcement actions.
Magazine: Chinese Tether laundromat, Bhutan enjoys recent Bitcoin boost: Asia Express
The CARF regulation, which brings crypto under global tax reporting standards akin to traditional finance, marks a crucial turning point.
The nascent real-world tokenized assets track prices but do not provide investors the same legal rights as holding the underlying instruments.
Rachel Reeves has hinted that taxes are likely to be raised this autumn after a major U-turn on the government’s controversial welfare bill.
Sir Keir Starmer’s Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill passed through the House of Commons on Tuesday after multiple concessions and threats of a major rebellion.
MPs ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to universal credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.
Initially aimed at saving £5.5bn, it now leaves the government with an estimated £5.5bn black hole – close to breaching Ms Reeves’s fiscal rules set out last year.
Read more:
Yet another fiscal ‘black hole’? Here’s why this one matters
Success or failure: One year of Keir in nine charts
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Rachel Reeves’s fiscal dilemma
In an interview with The Guardian, the chancellor did not rule out tax rises later in the year, saying there were “costs” to watering down the welfare bill.
“I’m not going to [rule out tax rises], because it would be irresponsible for a chancellor to do that,” Ms Reeves told the outlet.
“We took the decisions last year to draw a line under unfunded commitments and economic mismanagement.
“So we’ll never have to do something like that again. But there are costs to what happened.”
Meanwhile, The Times reported that, ahead of the Commons vote on the welfare bill, Ms Reeves told cabinet ministers the decision to offer concessions would mean taxes would have to be raised.
The outlet reported that the chancellor said the tax rises would be smaller than those announced in the 2024 budget, but that she is expected to have to raise tens of billions more.
It comes after Ms Reeves said she was “totally” up to continuing as chancellor after appearing tearful at Prime Minister’s Questions.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Why was the chancellor crying at PMQs?
Criticising Sir Keir for the U-turns on benefit reform during PMQs, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the chancellor looked “absolutely miserable”, and questioned whether she would remain in post until the next election.
Sir Keir did not explicitly say that she would, and Ms Badenoch interjected to say: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”
In her first comments after the incident, Ms Reeves said she was having a “tough day” before adding: “People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday.
“Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Reeves is ‘totally’ up for the job
Sir Keir also told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby on Thursday that he “didn’t appreciate” that Ms Reeves was crying in the Commons.
“In PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang,” he said. “That’s what it was yesterday.
“And therefore, I was probably the last to appreciate anything else going on in the chamber, and that’s just a straightforward human explanation, common sense explanation.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike