KPMG U.S. 完成 Tether International 年度財務報表的首次完整審計後,Tether 審計與 Tether 鑑證之間的差異變得更加重要。
多年來,Tether 定期發布專注於其儲備資訊的鑑證報告。這些報告就特定報告日期的具體管理層聲明提供第三方鑑證。
完整的財務報表審計具有更廣泛的目標。它會檢查財務報表及支持性證據,以便獨立審計師就報表是否在所有重大方面均依據相關會計框架公允呈現發表意見。
了解此區別有助於 USDT 使用者更準確地解讀透明度報告。
Tether 歷來使用獨立會計師事務所,為其定期儲備報告提供鑑證。
鑑證通常會檢視特定的主題事項或管理階層聲明。
對 Tether 而言,這意味著檢視如下資訊:
例如,Tether 由 BDO 編製的 2025 年第四季鑑證報告涵蓋截至 2025 年 12 月 31 日的財務數據及儲備報告。在該報告框架下,Tether 報告資產超過 1,928.7 億美元,負債約為 1,865.4 億美元。
關鍵概念在於,證明針對的是一項明確定義的聲明或快照。
財務報表審計範圍更廣。
PCAOB 標準將審計目標描述為取得合理保證,確保財務報表不存在重大錯報,並就該報表是否根據適用的財務報告架構公允呈現發表意見。
Tether 表示,其 KPMG 審計檢查了包括以下領域:
KPMG 也向 Reuters 確認,其依據 AICPA 標準對 Tether International 的 2025 年財務報表出具了無保留意見.
| 特點 | 儲備鑑證 | 財務報表審計 |
|---|---|---|
| 主要重點 | 特定管理層聲明 | 整體財務報表 |
| 典型時間視角 | 報告日快照 | 報告期間 |
| 儲備驗證 | 是,在所述範圍內 | 可能構成更廣泛審計工作的一部分 |
| 損益表 | 通常不是核心目標 | 已包含 |
| 現金流量表 | 通常不是核心目標 | 已包含 |
| 財務報表意見 | 無完整財務報表意見 | 是 |
| 已測試基礎證據 | 在定義的範圍內 | 更廣泛的審計證據 |
| 鑒證 | 由委任定義 | 財務報表審計的合理鑒證 |
| 消除所有風險? | 否 | 否 |
此區分並不表示證明毫無價值。
相反,這兩種互動回答的是不同的問題。
USDT 的運作規模足以讓透明度影響更廣泛的加密貨幣市場。
儲備證明可以回答:
“在所述標準下,截至該報告日期,所報告的資產是否超過所報告的代幣負債?”
完整的財務稽核更進一步回答:
“整體而言,公司的財務報表是否按照適用的會計框架公平呈列?”
這一更廣泛的範圍正是 Tether 的首次完整稽核引起重大關注的原因。
KPMG U.S. confirmed that it issued an unqualified opinion on Tether International's financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2025.
Tether stated that those audited financial statements showed reserves exceeding liabilities by approximately $6.814 billion.
The company also said the audit included physical inspection of its gold holdings and examination of transactions, systems, ownership documentation, valuations and counterparties.
Not necessarily.
Annual audited financial statements and more frequent reserve disclosures can complement each other.
An annual audit provides depth.
Periodic reserve reporting provides frequency.
For a rapidly changing stablecoin balance sheet, both can be useful because circulating supply and reserve composition can change materially between annual reporting dates.
Imagine a company completes an audit for December 31.
That audit provides assurance regarding the relevant reporting period, but stablecoin issuance continues every day afterward.
Users therefore still need more current information.
This is why periodic transparency reporting can remain valuable even after an annual audit has been completed.
No.
Audits are not insurance policies.
PCAOB standards explicitly describe audit assurance as reasonable assurance, not absolute assurance.
An audit also cannot eliminate future:
Users should read an audit as evidence about financial reporting, not as a guarantee against every future event.
MEXC Learn has two useful background resources:
What Is USDT (Tether)? A Complete Guide for Cryptocurrency Beginners
and
How Tether Maintains Its 1:1 Peg: Mechanics of USDT Reserves.
Together with current issuer disclosures, these resources help explain why reserve quality, liquidity and third-party assurance matter for a fiat-backed stablecoin.
Instead of asking only whether a report says “audit” or “attestation,” users can look deeper.
Important questions include:
This produces a much more useful assessment than simply treating every third-party report as equivalent.
An attestation provides assurance over defined information or assertions. A financial-statement audit examines the broader financial statements and supports an independent auditor's opinion on whether they are fairly presented.
Tether had regularly published reserve attestations. The KPMG engagement covering 2025 was its first full independent financial-statement audit.
KPMG U.S. audited Tether International's financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2025.
KPMG confirmed an unqualified opinion.
A full financial-statement audit is broader, but attestations can still provide useful and more frequent reserve information. The two are complementary rather than completely interchangeable.
Reuters reported that the audit itself had not been publicly released at the time of its August 14 report, even though KPMG confirmed issuing the unqualified opinion.

比特幣硬體錢包製造商 Coinkite 已警告用戶,Coldcard 裝置存在種子生成問題,影響範圍涵蓋所有 4.0.1 及更高版本的 Mk3 韌體。此警告是在安全研究人員調查一宗涉及 594.48 BTC(價值約 3,800 萬美元)的協調性盜取事件時出現的。然而,目前尚無公開的技術證據證實 Coldcard 的問題導致了這些轉帳。

如果銀行將傳統客戶存款以代幣形式呈現在區塊鏈基礎設施上,客戶實際上擁有什麼?一個幣種代幣?一個穩定幣?還是同一筆銀行存款以不同技術形式呈現?加拿大聯邦銀行監管機構現在已給金融機構一個非常直接的答案。2026年9月10日,加拿大金融機構監管局(OSFI)發布正式聲明,闡明其對代幣化及其他數位化存款的立場。其核心原則很簡單:用於呈現金融產品的技術並不決定其法律性質。根據OSFI關於代幣化存款的官方聲明

印度已將代幣化債券從監管規劃階段推進至實際金融基礎設施。2026年9月,三家印度公司透過Demat 2.0發行了合計₹1,025 crore(約1.07億美元)的公司債,這是一項新的受監管基礎設施,將傳統公司債以數位代幣形式呈現,同時使用印度儲備銀行的批發數位盧比進行現金結算。發行方包括:REC Limited — ₹500 croreLarsen & Toubro — ₹500 croreIIF

MetaMask 正成為一家獨立公司。2026年9月9日,Consensys Software Inc. 宣布將拆分為兩家獨立營運的企業:MetaMask,專注於消費者自我託管金融,以及一家新成立的 Consensys,專注於以太坊協議和機構級區塊鏈基礎設施。這個結構比單純說「MetaMask 離開 Consensys」要複雜一些。現有的 Consensys Software Inc. 法律實體將