That's also the reason why USDT was getting delisted from EU. However, i've heard that 60% of reserve must be related to the total amounts used to operate in EU, not whole of their stable coins, but this still needs some verifications.
Other than it, it clearly explain how tether is not as cleaning as USDC by circle who could comply to the MICA regulation. Don't you think it's weird circle can easily comply with Mica while tether can't?
Theorically, missing 450m potential market is weird for tether unless they have a transparency concern that may cause them a trouble in the future. So they're looking for special permission to operate there with the guarantee they won't get risked by being not transparent enough.
This is why i prefer USDC instead of USDT.
First of all, I want to confirm your point about the fact that not all $180B+ of USDT that Tether has issued would be needed for the reserve. Now, that's out of the way, I don't think Circle compliance should be used as benchmark for Tether. If anything, what happened to Circle in 2023 already showed that the rule itself is flawed. USDC depegged to $0.87 because $3.3B of its reserves was stuck in SVB. That's the same kind of bank exposure the 60% rule would force on issuers, with deposit insurance covering
only €100k per bank Tether disagreeing with that rule might not mean they are trying to hide stuff. They have gotten a thorough audit recently so if they had anything to hide, they wouldn't have done that audit. Moreover, most central banks like ECB and EU central banks don't like that rule too because it causes a "contagion risk".
