A person claimed: “How does this differ from a CBDC?”
While EE. UU. Regulates Stablecoins, “rejects” the CBDC, generating controversies.
On July 20, 2025, Tether, the company behind the USDT stable, froze 85,977 USDT from a transaction linked to an alleged hacking that occurred the previous day.
The company’s CEO, Paolo Ardoino, confirmed The measure, declaring: «fact. We block (in collaboration with the forces of the law) the 85,977 USDT stolen ». However, Ardoino did not detail the process used to verify that those funds were effectively stolen.
The USDT 90,000 were initially moved by a Binance user, and subsequently stolen after interaction with a contract identified as Fake_phisking1307655 For the explorer. Said transfer, which was reported on network Xcan be seen in the following image extracted from Etherscan:
The blocking or freezing mechanism of Funds by Tether is based on its control on the intelligent USDT contract in networks such as Ethereum, Tron and others.
These contracts include functions that allow Tether (or, more specifically, authorized administrators) freeze specific addresses When using Commands called “Freeze“(Freeze) or”Blacklist”(Black List), absent in really decentralized networks such as Bitcoin.
When detecting a suspicious transaction, such as the hacking of the almost 90,000 USDT, identifies the affected address and its network. In those cases, the command “Freeze“Mark the address as” frozen “, disabled transfer functions in the contract without modifying the underlying chain.
Optionally, to recover funds, Tether can coordinate with exchanges, issuing new tokens to the original owner and burning the stolen, adjusting the supply, although this depends on third parties and is not always implemented.
Thus, that ability to tether, to freeze or block USDT, as cryptootics reported in the past, has fueled the debate on the implications of a centralized digital asset.
For example, a person He replied To Ardoino’s publication in X: “Can anyone explain how this is not exactly what a CBDC is?”referring to the digital currencies of Banco Central (CBDC), which are digital versions of Fiat coins emitted and controlled by central governments or banks.
Another comment, although more critical, pointed out: «Then it is a centralized Shitcoin. Thanks for confirmation »using a derogatory term for low quality cryptocurrencies and underlining the perception of centralization in Tether.
These questions are aligned with the recent vision set out from cryptootics, which stands out how in the US. It is promised to “attack” the CBDC while indirectly favors them.
The Chamber of Representatives of the Congress of that country approved last Thursday the Genius law, regulating Stablcoins, establishing frames for issuance and supervision. Now the signature of President Donald Trump is missing for this law to enter.
At the same time, USA promotes the Anti-CBDC law, which seeks to prevent the development of a state digital currency, reflecting a rejection of CBDC for fear of excessive government control that could limit financial privacy.
There lies the paradox: while the public CBDCs are limited, stablcoins are strengthened with legal status, resembling them functionally to those.
While Tether’s foundations when executing those capacities They are based on avoiding illegal behaviorssuch as money laundering and robberies, the debate on privacy and centralization is at the foot of the canyon.
And, users’ questions, they actually function as an answer to understand, for example, why Bitcoin is Bitcoin: a decentralized protocol Without being managed by a central authority Establish the rules alone.
Unlike Tether and its USDT, Bitcoin operates on a network where Transactions are validated by globally distributed nodeswithout intervention of a unique entity.
