BTC
ETH
HTX
SOL
BNB
View Market
简中
繁中
English
日本語
한국어
ภาษาไทย
Tiếng Việt
2025
12/01
Mindao@mindaoyang
The annual Tether controversy has returned. Let's start with the facts: Looking at Tether's disclosed reserve structure, USDT has indeed long suffered from a structural mismatch between assets and liabilities (USDT issuance). This isn't about insufficient capital (currently equity/total assets are approximately 3.7%), but rather the mismatch: for every 1 USDT of liability, there are approximately $1.037 in assets, of which $0.88 is highly liquid US dollar assets (such as US Treasury bonds), and $0.15 is highly volatile assets (BTC + gold). Arthur's analysis suggests that if BTC/gold prices fall sharply, this $1.037 in assets could fall below the $1 in liabilities, rendering USDT undercollateralized—a logically valid point. Tether's allocation of some reserves to BTC/gold, instead of fully allocating them to highly liquid US dollar assets, is incorrect. This is the core reason why it cannot achieve compliance in the US/Europe. For every USDT minted, Tether not only earns all the interest from government bonds but also provides holders with $0.15 of leverage for long BTC/gold positions free of charge. However, I believe market concerns are still amplified. Tether releases a reserve report, not a complete financial statement, and the biggest uncertainty lies in dividends. Over the past nine months, it has distributed approximately $10 billion in dividends (e.g., profits remitted to the parent company). Considering the high interest rate cycle of recent years, it's reasonable to speculate that it has already off-balance-sheet valued at $20-30 billion through dividends, which is not reflected in its current proof-of-reserve. If these rights remain within the group's system, its true safety cushion may be far higher than the current apparent figures. However, Tether's size is already at the global system level. Achieving true 100% USD backing is far more important than using users' minted money for directional bets. This annual FUD (Funds, Uncertainty, and Debt) damage to the brand and this extra gain, in Chinese parlance, is a case of "picking up sesame seeds and losing a watermelon."
Source: Twitter