This report summarizes stablecoin blacklist, freeze, and seizure actions in Eagle Virtual's indexed coverage. It provides token and network breakdowns, year-by-year counts, and practical notes for interpreting the data. Compact headline figures elsewhere on the site are floored; the generated tables on this page show exact counts at the stated data timestamp. These are coverage-scoped records, not universal industry totals.
A stablecoin blacklist is an on-chain control implemented through a token contract or a network-native token authority. Its target and effect depend on the deployment. On reviewed Ethereum, TRON, Avalanche, and Celo USDT deployments, a restricted address cannot send USDT but can still receive it. On Solana, a frozen USDT token account cannot receive, transfer, or burn USDT until thawed. This report examines recorded control actions across covered deployments. For a detailed explanation of how they work, see our guide on how stablecoin blacklists work.
Executive Summary
This report summarizes Eagle Virtual's indexed on-chain blacklist dataset as of August 13, 2026. The generated tables below provide current counts for covered token deployments and networks at that timestamp. Counts can change as new actions occur or coverage is extended. They show that an action occurred; they do not establish why it occurred or whether the target was associated with wrongdoing.
Key findings at a glance:
- The token table ranks covered token entries by recorded restriction and seizure actions.
- Completed-year counts increased through 2025 in this dataset; 2026 is a partial year and should not be compared with a completed year without accounting for the shorter period.
- Recorded actions appear on Ethereum, TRON, several Layer 2 networks, and other covered chains.
- Control state is deployment-specific. An action on one network does not automatically propagate to another network.
Aggregate Blacklist Statistics by Token
The following table ranks tokens by recorded restriction actions and seizures across the token deployments represented in Eagle Virtual's coverage. It is refreshed from the indexed data. The restriction count already includes freezes, so freezes are not added a second time.
| Token | Issuer | Freezes | Seizures | Total actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| USDT | Tether | 11,108 | 2,313 | 13,421 |
| USDC | Circle | 4,119 | 0 | 4,119 |
| XSGD | StraitsX | 3,756 | 0 | 3,756 |
| USD0 | Usual | 3,516 | 0 | 3,516 |
| EURC | Circle | 1,523 | 0 | 1,523 |
| USDC.e | Gnosis Chain Omnibridge | 1,261 | 0 | 1,261 |
| USDC | Circle / JustCryptos | 1,038 | 0 | 1,038 |
| cbBTC | Coinbase | 941 | 0 | 941 |
| cbETH | Coinbase | 938 | 0 | 938 |
| cbBTC | Coinbase | 936 | 0 | 936 |
Year-over-Year Trends
The indexed record contains few actions in its earliest years and larger counts in later completed years. That describes the covered data; it does not, by itself, identify a cause. Changes can reflect new on-chain actions as well as changes in token and network coverage.
2020–2022: Foundation Phase
Recorded actions were relatively uncommon in this dataset during the early period. The August 2022 Tornado Cash OFAC designation is an important dated sanctions event, but issuer control records and government sanctions records are separate sources. An on-chain action does not establish that a sanctions designation caused it unless a primary source makes that connection.
2023–2024: Acceleration Phase
The covered counts rose during 2023 and 2024, and actions were recorded on more token and network combinations. The record shows when and where an action occurred, not its private rationale. Company or government announcements are needed to attribute a particular action to a law-enforcement request, security incident, or sanctions decision.
2025–2026: Maturity Phase
The 2025 completed-year count is higher than earlier completed years in the covered dataset. The 2026 row is year to date, so it covers a shorter period and is not a like-for-like annual comparison.
Separate issuers may record actions involving the same target, but the on-chain records alone do not prove coordination or a shared rationale. Likewise, a control action on one network does not automatically propagate to another deployment. Our stablecoin freeze case studies distinguish public company statements from what the chain itself shows.
Chain-by-Chain Breakdown
The distribution below shows where covered actions were recorded. It should not be treated as a measure of total stablecoin use, user location, or the reason for an action. For a live view of Eagle Virtual's chain coverage, see our supported chains page.
- Ethereum: The covered dataset records actions for multiple token deployments on Ethereum, including USDT and USDC.
- TRON: The covered TRON records are primarily USDT control actions.
- Arbitrum, Optimism, Base: the current covered counts are Base 1,983 recorded freezes, Arbitrum 1,476, and Optimism 514.
- Avalanche and Celo: Eagle Virtual records 1,342 freezes on Avalanche and 490 on Celo.
Check the exact token and network
Control state and mechanics are deployment-specific. An action involving a token on one network does not automatically apply to a version of that token on another network.
Key Takeaways for Compliance Teams
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a stablecoin blacklist?
A stablecoin blacklist or freeze is an on-chain control that restricts an address or token account. The exact effect depends on the token and network. On reviewed Ethereum, TRON, Avalanche, and Celo USDT deployments, a restricted address cannot send USDT but can still receive it; a frozen Solana USDT token account cannot receive, transfer, or burn USDT until thawed. Major companies including Tether, Circle, and Usual maintain controls on covered deployments. See our full explanation of stablecoin blacklists for more detail.
Which stablecoin has the most recorded blacklist actions?
In Eagle Virtual's current covered dataset, USDT has the largest recorded action count, followed by other tokens shown in the generated table. See the aggregate statistics section for the exact breakdown at the stated data timestamp.
How quickly can stablecoin issuers freeze funds?
There is no universal issuer response time. Once a valid on-chain action is confirmed or finalized, that deployment enforces its control. Time before submission depends on the company and circumstances. Our freeze case studies separate dated on-chain actions from company descriptions of particular cases.
Do stablecoin blacklists work across all blockchains?
Each token deployment has separate control state and mechanics; some bridged tokens may not expose the same control. A restriction on Ethereum is not automatically a restriction on another network. Review the exact token and network used. Eagle Virtual records covered control actions across multiple chains to address this gap.
Methodology and Data Access
This report is based on normalized on-chain control records for covered token deployments. Contract logs and network-native instructions are normalized by action type. Government sanctions records come from separate official sources and are not inferred from issuer contracts. Counts preserve distinct on-chain actions and remove only duplicate ingestion of the same natural on-chain record, using its network, transaction or instruction position, action, and target as applicable. They do not collapse all activity for one issuer and target.
The tables on this page show exact counts for the covered deployments at the stated data timestamp and are refreshed on publish. Compact headline figures elsewhere are floored. A count can still differ from another provider's depending on how events are counted (per-address vs. per-transaction), which contracts are in scope, and the time window applied, so compare definitions before comparing numbers. Eagle Virtual provides programmatic access to this data through its API for organizations that need exact figures for their own research or compliance programs.