Crypto Stablecoin Law Faces Pushback As New York Prosecutors Target Tether, Circle

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-02-04Actualizado a 2026-02-04

Resumen

New York Attorney General Letitia James, along with four district attorneys, is pushing back against the newly enacted GENIUS Act, the first major U.S. stablecoin law. They argue the law fails to protect victims of financial crimes, as it does not require stablecoin issuers to return stolen funds. This omission, they warn, could embolden companies to retain stolen assets. The prosecutors specifically criticized the two largest issuers, Tether and Circle. They allege Tether inconsistently freezes funds and primarily cooperates only with federal law enforcement. They claim Circle’s policies are “significantly worse,” alleging it often retains control of frozen assets to continue earning interest, creating a financial incentive to delay returning funds. Both companies rejected the allegations, asserting their commitment to combating illicit activity.

As negotiations continue in Washington over the crypto market structure legislation known as the CLARITY Act, New York’s top law enforcement officials are now turning their attention to a bill that has already become law.

Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, a group of senior prosecutors is raising concerns about the GENIUS Act, the first major US crypto law focused on regulating stablecoins.

Alleged Regulatory Gaps In Crypto Law

According to a report from CNN, James joined four district attorneys, including Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, in warning lawmakers that the GENIUS Act fails to adequately protect victims of financial crime.

In a letter to Congress, the prosecutors argue that the law gives what they describe as an “imprimatur of legitimacy” to stablecoins, while allowing issuing companies to sidestep critical regulatory obligations needed to combat terrorism financing, drug trafficking, money laundering, and, in particular, cryptocurrency fraud.

A central concern for the prosecutors is not what the GENIUS Act includes, but what it leaves out. They argue that the law does not require stablecoin issuers to return stolen funds to victims of fraud. This omission, they say, risks encouraging harmful behavior.

In their view, the lack of a clear legal obligation could embolden stablecoin companies to retain stolen assets rather than cooperate fully with law enforcement efforts to make victims whole. The prosecutors warned that this gap may effectively provide legal cover for firms that choose to keep control of stolen funds.

Tether Rejects Allegations

The letter singles out the two largest stablecoin issuers, Tether (USDT) and Circle (USDC), claiming both have hindered efforts to seize and return illicit funds, while continuing to profit from activity that prosecutors say remains widespread in stablecoin markets.

The prosecutors allege that the company has used this power inconsistently and primarily in coordination with federal law enforcement, rather than in response to state or local actions.

As a result, they argue, many victims have little chance of recovering stolen funds once assets are converted into USDT. The letter states that funds moved into USDT are often never frozen, seized, or returned, and that Tether currently decides on a case‐by‐case basis whether to assist in recovery efforts.

Tether responded to CNN by strongly rejecting the suggestion that it tolerates illicit activity. The company said it takes fraud, consumer harm, and misuse of USDT extremely seriously and maintains a zero‐tolerance policy toward criminal behavior.

Circle Faces Sharper Scrutiny

The prosecutors’ criticism of Circle, the second‐largest stablecoin issuer, is even sharper. Circle is publicly traded and based in New York, and the letter acknowledges that the company presents itself as a partner in the fight against financial crime.

However, the prosecutors argue that Circle’s policies are “significantly worse than those of Tether” when it comes to helping victims recover stolen funds.

They allege that even when Circle agrees to freeze assets linked to fraud, it typically retains control of those funds rather than returning them to victims or law enforcement.

By holding the underlying reserves, the prosecutors say, Circle continues to earn interest, creating what they describe as a “crystal clear” financial incentive to delay or deny fund returns.

Circle pushed back against these claims in a statement to CNN. Dante Disparte, the company’s chief strategy officer, said Circle has consistently prioritized financial integrity and the advancement of strong regulatory standards in the US and globally.

He argued that the crypto law clearly requires stablecoin issuers to follow applicable rules to combat illicit activity while also strengthening consumer protections.

The 1-D chart shows the total crypto market drop to $2.5 trillion on Tuesday. Source: TOTAL on TradingView.com

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main concern raised by New York prosecutors regarding the GENIUS Act?

AThe main concern is that the GENIUS Act fails to adequately protect victims of financial crime by not requiring stablecoin issuers to return stolen funds to victims, which could embolden companies to retain stolen assets and provide legal cover for firms that choose to keep control of stolen funds.

QWhich two major stablecoin issuers are specifically targeted in the prosecutors' letter?

AThe two major stablecoin issuers specifically targeted are Tether (USDT) and Circle (USDC).

QHow did Tether respond to the prosecutors' allegations?

ATether strongly rejected the suggestion that it tolerates illicit activity, stating that it takes fraud, consumer harm, and misuse of USDT extremely seriously and maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward criminal behavior.

QWhy do prosecutors claim Circle's policies are 'significantly worse than those of Tether'?

AProsecutors claim that even when Circle agrees to freeze assets linked to fraud, it typically retains control of those funds rather than returning them to victims or law enforcement, and continues to earn interest on the underlying reserves, creating a financial incentive to delay or deny fund returns.

QWhat is the name of the crypto market structure legislation mentioned that is still under negotiation in Washington?

AThe crypto market structure legislation mentioned is called the CLARITY Act.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Strategy's Loss in the Second Quarter Reaches $8.22 Billion Amid Bitcoin Decline

Strategy, the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin, reported a net loss of $8.22 billion for the second quarter. This loss was primarily driven by an $8.32 billion unrealized loss on its Bitcoin holdings due to a decline in the asset's price during the period. Despite these paper losses, the company increased its Bitcoin holdings to 843,775 BTC, a 25% growth since the start of the year. As part of a new monetization strategy, Strategy sold approximately $218.4 million worth of Bitcoin, mainly to fund dividends for preferred shareholders, with $216 million of that sold after Q2 ended. The company also built a $3.75 billion cash reserve, which it claims is sufficient to cover over two years of dividend and interest payments, aiming to insulate itself from Bitcoin's volatility while meeting obligations. Following the earnings release, Strategy's stock (MSTR) rose 4.7% in regular trading but corrected slightly after-hours. This pattern reflects how the company's accounting results are heavily tied to Bitcoin's price swings, even as its long-term strategy remains unchanged. The report indicates that Strategy is maintaining its core strategy of accumulating Bitcoin while building a financial buffer. This quarterly loss follows a recognizable pattern, with the company posting significant unrealized losses in previous quarters (e.g., $12.4 billion in Q4 2025 and ~$12.5 billion in Q1 2026) due to fair-value accounting. A key technical shift is its new monetization program, which introduces periodic selling pressure on the market, transitioning Strategy from a pure accumulator to a participant that occasionally adds supply. A critical question remains: how long can the cash reserve cover dividend obligations if a Bitcoin price downturn persists beyond two years?

cryptonews.ruHace 18 min(s)

Strategy's Loss in the Second Quarter Reaches $8.22 Billion Amid Bitcoin Decline

cryptonews.ruHace 18 min(s)

Will Terrorist Durov Ban Russian Officials?

Telegram founder Pavel Durov publicly reacted to being labeled a "terrorist" by Russian authorities, stating the designation came after he refused demands for mass surveillance and censorship on the platform. In a Telegram post, he highlighted that this status formally bans him from "publishing information online." Durov concluded with a statement widely circulated: Russian officials "clearly don't understand who can ban whom on the internet." This remark suggests Durov could potentially restrict official Russian government and officials' channels on Telegram, which continue to operate on the platform despite its formal blocking in Russia. The situation parallels previous, slow-moving state directives, like switching officials to domestic cars, contrasted with the current push to migrate all government communication to the Russian-made messenger MAX by 2030. However, reports indicate many officials still use Telegram via workarounds, fearing surveillance on MAX, while alternatives like BiP and KakaoTalk recently became inaccessible in Russia without a VPN. Durov has not specified any immediate actions against state channels. His statement is an initial response, with further developments depending on the authorities' reaction. The dynamic differs from 2020 when Russian regulators lifted a block on Telegram; now, Durov implies control from within the platform itself over the official accounts that persisted through that earlier blockade.

cryptonews.ruHace 18 min(s)

Will Terrorist Durov Ban Russian Officials?

cryptonews.ruHace 18 min(s)

DeepSeek V4 Official Version Arrives, New Capabilities Emerge, Value-for-Money King Enters the Fray

On July 31st, DeepSeek officially launched the public API beta for its DeepSeek-V4-Flash model. A key highlight is its performance on multiple Agent benchmark tests, reportedly nearing or even surpassing the level of the V4-Pro preview version from three months ago. Notably, the Flash model achieves this with significantly smaller scale (130B active parameters vs. Pro's 490B), suggesting that post-training optimization and data quality may be as crucial as raw model size. DeepSeek emphasized that the V4-Flash-0731 uses the same model architecture and size as its preview version, with improvements attributed solely to "re-trained post-training." The update also marks the official debut of DeepSeek's self-developed Agent framework, "Harness." The move signals DeepSeek's strategic push to position its cost-effective Flash model as a competitive base for Agent applications—scenarios requiring autonomous planning, tool usage, and complex task execution—where inference speed and cost are critical. By natively supporting OpenAI's Responses API format and adapting for code-generation scenarios, DeepSeek aims not just to be a cheaper alternative but to establish its own ecosystem in the Agent era. This release follows DeepSeek's record-breaking ~$50 billion fundraising round roughly two months prior, underscoring market confidence in its technology and commercialization prospects. The company is reportedly preparing for another funding round at a valuation of approximately $71 billion. The Flash model's advancement represents a step in fulfilling the high expectations that come with this valuation, setting the stage for the impending release of the V4-Pro official version and intensifying competition in the global Agent landscape.

marsbitHace 22 min(s)

DeepSeek V4 Official Version Arrives, New Capabilities Emerge, Value-for-Money King Enters the Fray

marsbitHace 22 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片