When law enforcement agencies turn their attention to the blockchain world, stablecoin issuers face a fundamental choice—whether to actively cooperate or to maintain distance. This choice directly determines who can win this "cat-and-mouse game."

The multinational operation in November 2025 is enough to illustrate the point. With the cooperation of law enforcement, Tether froze approximately 400 million Thai Baht worth of USDT in one go, cleanly dismantling a large Southeast Asian scam network. But this is far from the whole story for Tether. Data shows that this stablecoin giant has frozen over $3.2 billion in assets in recent years. How exaggerated is this number? It accounts for 18% of the total global cryptocurrency scam losses in 2024—a company's actions that have offset one-fifth of the entire industry’s criminal impact.

Last year, Tether set several records. It assisted the U.S. Department of Justice in recovering $225.3 million in "pig-butchering" scam proceeds, making it the department’s largest single crypto asset recovery case of the year. By November 2025, during the Thai operation, it froze 12 million USDT in one go. The underlying figures better reflect the company's level of activity: Tether has established formal cooperation with 290 law enforcement agencies across 59 jurisdictions worldwide.

Now, look at how Circle operates. As an industry-recognized "compliance model student," Circle’s record of freezing assets appears much more restrained. In 2023, it only froze about $75,000 worth of USDC in response to law enforcement requests. The scale difference between the two is more than several times—this is already a matter of magnitude.

Behind this stark contrast are two completely different strategic mindsets. Tether’s approach is proactive—since transactions on the blockchain cannot be hidden, it chooses to become the most reliable partner for law enforcement. By deeply participating in crime-fighting, it can strengthen its compliance position and speak with results. Meanwhile, Circle seems more cautious, viewing asset freezes as a last resort, and generally responding passively to law enforcement requests.

From a market survival perspective, both strategies have their logic. Tether’s large-scale cooperation with law enforcement has earned it an "official endorsement" halo, which is crucial for long-term confidence in stablecoins. Circle, on the other hand, maintains a low profile while adhering to compliance bottom lines, also satisfying some users’ demand for "privacy"—though the definition of privacy is becoming narrower and narrower.

But as global regulation of cryptocurrencies tightens, it’s hard to say which strategy will be more popular. Tether’s proactive stance has made it a formal player within the enforcement system; Circle’s conservative approach leaves more room for flexibility. This competition is far from over.