USDT returning to Bitcoin Network According to Tether CEO

[Danish Ali]

It's still basically the same thing, once blacklisted the bridge is not valid anymore, you have the coins but they are unspendable over the network so they will not be able to get your coins but you can't use them either, the only thing they can't do a thing about is your actual Bitcoins.

But also consider that Tether has already burned $698M from blacklisted addresses in 2025 on Ethereum and Tron. If you get frozen on Ethereum or Tron, "your money is gone/frozen forever", assuming Tether doesnt free it out of mercy.

​With the freeze on RGB, it's "unspendable as USDT but you keep the underlying BTC." In essence, "your money reverted to its base layer form." In terms of actual loss, freezing on RGB isn't going to result in zero assets (worst case). You still have BTC in hand and it retains market value. Whereas historically, freezing on Ethereum/Tron has resulted in complete loss where frozen tokens become worthless.

​Its a headache if youre looking to move your money around right now, that part is the same for RGB vs Ethereum/Tron. But it's what happens next where RGB is better, since youre left with an asset of real value, whereas smart contract freezes historically leave you with nothing.

[Dogedegen]

Well since it means injecting arbitrary data into bitcoin's blockchain (data that is not part of the Bitcoin protocol and is not enforced by it) that makes it a spam transaction in my book; therefore I don't like this news. But it is useful for people who want to use this centralized altcoin to transfer some funds around without needing to own altcoins (you need to pay fees on altcchains when moving tether) or altcoin wallets.

It is not spam. People are building protocols and things on top of Bitcoin by making transactions that go along the consensus rules. If you start deciding what is spam or not based on your personal views then we are back at being a fake decentralized PayPal. Unless someone wants to be purely consistent and reject any protocols and layers, that would mean also rejecting things like the Lightning Network. Even if wrong that opinion would be more understandable because of the consistency, but random decisions what is spam or not is the wrong way that brings us back to centralized decision authority.

Bitcoin already has a useful utility as a payment system, we don't need to pile every other utility into it. It doesn't scale and it only creates "clog".

Layer 2 and Layer 3 make Bitcoin scale, without those it is impossible. Bitcoin is too restricted.

Having more diversified networks is probably good for them.
Also, there are some people who are not into crypto as a rule that do use stablecoins.
There are other people who are BTC and only BTC.
This *might* *possibly* *a little bit* let those people transact a bit.

Diversification of chains to send on is also good, but I just do not see a lot of people using it.

-Dave

Yeah it is a good development that does not harm anyone, some users here have big bias against certain companies or things so they always act like those negative nancies. USDT is here to stay, and there will be more protocols on Bitcoin even if some people want to restrict the freedom of others to build on top of Bitcoin. It seems that some people never really wanted true decentralization, they just pretended..

[batang_bitcoin]

I see it as good for those who always use USDT for their transactions. They can now have many options for the networks to choose from. But I hope that this will not be the disruption of the quiet network of bitcoin on chain when we're already happy with the low fees which have been so stable for a couple of years. Because when bitcoin's on chain has been used by some of these spams as brc20, the fee have increased a lot and the speed had slowed down. Hopefully this won't be the same case for this.

[PrivacyG]

It is not spam. People are building protocols and things on top of Bitcoin by making transactions that go along the consensus rules. If you start deciding what is spam or not based on your personal views then we are back at being a fake decentralized PayPal. Unless someone wants to be purely consistent and reject any protocols and layers, that would mean also rejecting things like the Lightning Network. Even if wrong that opinion would be more understandable because of the consistency, but random decisions what is spam or not is the wrong way that brings us back to centralized decision authority.

Some transactions can be categorized as spam with out cracking down on them.  I believe that is what pooya87 says, they simply do not like the spam it would create but the same thing we see as spam may be actually helpful to some people.

Bitcoin will at some point have to adapt to what ever happens, and this 'what ever' may actually be a lot of arbitrary data.  I do not LIKE it either but it is what it is.  I did not like the BIP-110 proposal either and I am happy it did not succeed.

[PERtua]

The most interesting element isn't just the return of USDT to Bitcoin. But the way that it functions. As compared to the original Omni version. The former would provide users with greater privacy and control. And the latter could aid in the quicker transactions. I would have to wait for the real world testing before I would say much about the improvement. Reduced fees and faster speeds are helpful. But it's also crucial to have a wallet that is supported and can be easily recovered in case of problems. In the future when RGB based USDT is widely usable, do you think people will abandon Tron. Or is the low cost of USDT and the adoption of it current still going to keep Tron ahead?

[yhiaali3]

Tether and privacy, this is truly hilarious!!!
Just a few weeks ago, they froze millions of dollars belonging to Iran at the request of the United States government.

The last thing I'd think about is USDT having anything to do with privacy. It might be good for speed and low fees, but privacy... it's impossible.

[5W-KILO]

Well since it means injecting arbitrary data into bitcoin's blockchain (data that is not part of the Bitcoin protocol and is not enforced by it) that makes it a spam transaction in my book; therefore I don't like this news. But it is useful for people who want to use this centralized altcoin to transfer some funds around without needing to own altcoins (you need to pay fees on altcchains when moving tether) or altcoin wallets.

In addition to that it could also give Bitcoin more utility beyond just holding BTC.

Satoshi has already responded to this comment 16 years ago:

Piling every proof-of-work quorum system in the world into one dataset doesn't scale.

Bitcoin and BitDNS can be used separately.  Users shouldn't have to download all of both to use one or the other.  BitDNS users may not want to download everything the next several unrelated networks decide to pile in either.

Bitcoin already has a useful utility as a payment system, we don't need to pile every other utility into it. It doesn't scale and it only creates "clog".

I believe we are feeling the same way about this news, Tether is a good stable coin and every bitcoin holders or most Bitcoin holders are using USDT to buy Bitcoin or DCA into Bitcoin, I think this is not really necessary.

I have read about this few months back and I was like why should we have USDT this close to Bitcoin network when every crypto exchanges already have. USDT pair to Bitcoin? There is no crypto exchanges that doesn't have BTC/USDT.

This pair is the most popular among others, so why going this dip? Until they make everything looks so much like centralised? Until they erased every traces of decentralisation from Bitcoin? I know that's impossible but gullible newbies will be more confused.

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

I believe we are feeling the same way about this news, Tether is a good stable coin and every bitcoin holders or most Bitcoin holders are using USDT to buy Bitcoin or DCA into Bitcoin, I think this is not really necessary.

I have read about this few months back and I was like why should we have USDT this close to Bitcoin network when every crypto exchanges already have. USDT pair to Bitcoin? There is no crypto exchanges that doesn't have BTC/USDT

Bitcoin can be bought by many things, many ways, many exchanging methods and USDT is only one of these available things for buying or selling bitcoins.

There are physical item exchanges for bitcoin like pizzas, honey, gift cards.
There are ways to use cash for buying bitcoin, selling bitcoin for cash.
There are other trading pairs for bitcoins to shitcoins.

I really don't get why people feel panic because of USDT and there are other stablecoins too while stablecoins are not actually stable and risky to hold your wealth in long term. Depeg and fund freeze are very big risks with stablecoins like USDT.

Can Tether seize your stablecoin USDT? A $42M lawsuit.

[spiker777]

If we can cast aside the Privacy fact I think it's goo move for Bitcoin and it's native chain. A healthy volume can be added on the chain. On the other hand I am curious about what privacy they are looking for launching on bitcoin or it's native protocol.

Except it will not be in Bitcoin's native chain. That is technically impossible. Bitcoin's native blockchain does not support smart contracts; we can't deploy tokens there like we do in Ethereum and Solana chains.
Here we are talkinga bout Omni chain, which is a side chain of Bitcoin,.
But still It surely has it's own advantage and benifits for bitcoin enthusiasts.

[TedMosby]

Not sure if USDT really needs to be back on BTC if Tether only wants to expand the networks where they are available. I see it benefiting Bitcoin more rather than USDT itself, especially for those people who are maxi enough that it makes them anti-non-Bitcoin-blockchain. So they don't need to leave the Bitcoin network and switch to other networks like Ethereum, Tron, or other popular USDT networks.

I found it interesting when I read this in that source:

There are three primary use cases, according to Utexo: private USDT transfers; direct swaps between native BTC and USDT without routing through an exchange; and lending, in which borrowers can use native bitcoin as collateral without wrapping it on another blockchain (as is the case with tokens like WBTC).

The private USDT transfer might be one of the features that would be loved by the Bitcoin community. Direct swaps are also interesting, but how would the liquidity provider work? Centralized by Tether?

IMO, this can be a strong catalyst for BTCFi. Because if this integration eventually grows big and can attract bigger volume and liquidity, for sure developers, exchanges, merchants, or others would take advantage of this and make Bitcoin able to offer more good things rather than just holding.