Tether said on August 13 that KPMG US had completed the first annual financial statement audit of the entity that issues USDT. The firm issued an unqualified opinion on the accounts for the year ended December 31, 2025, according to the company and a confirmation KPMG provided directly to Reuters.

That is a substantive step. A financial statement audit reaches beyond a quarterly attestation of reserves at one point in time. Yet the public still cannot inspect the documents behind the milestone. Tether has released neither KPMG’s signed report nor the financial statements and notes. The defensible conclusion is therefore narrower than the company’s headline: the auditor confirms its opinion, while readers cannot assess the underlying detail.

What has actually been confirmed

In its August 13 announcement, Tether says KPMG US audited the 2025 financial statements of Tether International, S.A. de C.V. The disclosed scope covers the balance sheet, income, changes in equity and cash flows, alongside evidence supporting transactions, valuations, counterparties and ownership records.

KPMG confirmed the central fact. A spokesperson told Reuters, in a report available through Yahoo Finance, that the firm had issued an unqualified opinion under AICPA standards for the year ended December 31, 2025. KPMG declined further comment because of client confidentiality.

Tether says the statements use US generally accepted accounting principles. Its chief financial officer says they show reserves exceeding liabilities by $6.814 billion at year-end. The company also says KPMG physically counted and inspected every gold bar it held. Both details are descriptions supplied by Tether; no public audit report is available to show their exact wording and context.

The claim that this was the “largest inaugural financial audit in history” also comes from Tether. It provides no independent ranking or comparison method, so GatherHub treats that phrase as corporate positioning rather than an established record.

An annual audit and a reserve attestation answer different questions

Tether had previously relied mainly on quarterly attestations prepared by BDO Italia. Those engagements examine a defined reserve report on a specific date and provide assurance over the information in that report. They can help reconcile declared assets with tokens outstanding, but they are not a full audit of a year’s financial activity.

A financial statement audit considers a broader system: assets and liabilities, revenue and expenses, cash flows, equity, controls and transaction samples. The auditor assesses whether the accounts are fairly presented, in all material respects, under the chosen accounting framework. It is therefore more than a snapshot of the reserve portfolio on the final day of a quarter.

That distinction matters for a stablecoin issuer. Users depend not only on whether assets exist, but on who owns them, how they are valued, the issuer’s other obligations, its relationships with custodians and counterparties, and its ability to process redemptions. GatherHub’s Stablecoins course explains why a token’s peg rests on this legal and operational chain, not only on its secondary-market price.

What an unqualified opinion does not guarantee

An unqualified — or unmodified — opinion is the most favourable standard audit outcome. It means KPMG concluded that the 2025 financial statements were fairly presented, in all material respects, under US GAAP. It does not mean that every transaction was checked individually, that no immaterial error exists or that the auditor endorses Tether’s business strategy.

Nor does it guarantee the future value of assets, immediate liquidity across the reserve portfolio or redemption of every USDT under any stress scenario. An audit covers a period and a closing date. It relies on materiality, testing and professional judgement; it is neither insurance against loss nor continuous supervision.

The opinion also concerns Tether International’s 2025 statements. It should not automatically be extended to every group company, every Tether-branded product or the company’s financial position in August 2026. Tether has since released a separate attestation for June 30, 2026, reporting a $4.11 billion reserve buffer. Dates and scopes differ, so directly comparing that figure with the $6.814 billion disclosed for year-end 2025 would be misleading.

A private report leaves verifiable questions unanswered

Reuters explicitly reports that the audit was not made public. Tether’s announcement does not link to the financial statements or a signed copy of KPMG’s opinion either. That does not contradict KPMG’s confirmation, but it prevents independent scrutiny of the essential documents.

Readers should be able to inspect the precise entity scope, valuation methods, asset and liability categories, related-party notes, subsequent events, concentration risks and the complete opinion wording. They should also be able to distinguish reserves supporting issued tokens from the company’s other assets, investments and obligations.

Without those documents, the evidence falls into three layers. KPMG confirms that an unqualified opinion exists. Tether supplies its general description and highlighted figures. A detailed public analysis of the accounts remains impossible. Decrypt makes the related point that a favourable opinion is not an endorsement of the business or a guarantee that every future obligation will be met.

Why Tether’s transparency history still matters

The audit follows years of criticism and delayed commitments. In 2021, the CFTC fined Tether $41 million over misleading statements about USDT being fully backed by US dollars between 2016 and 2019. Its order found that sufficient fiat reserves were present on only 27.6% of the days in a 26-month sample and that other assets or receivables had been included without adequate disclosure.

That same year, the New York Attorney General reached an $18.5 million settlement with Tether and Bitfinex, imposed reporting obligations and ended their trading activity with New Yorkers. Those findings describe an earlier period; they do not establish that the 2025 accounts are wrong. They do explain why the quality, continuity and accessibility of Tether’s reporting carry unusual weight.

Moving from point-in-time attestations to an annual Big Four audit addresses a concrete criticism. Keeping the report confidential leaves the public part of that response unfinished. For a stablecoin used as settlement infrastructure, trust depends both on controls being performed and on what users and supervisors can actually read.

Why this matters now

USDT serves as a settlement asset across many exchanges and blockchains. Weakness at its issuer could spread to markets that use the token for liquidity, collateral or payments. Conversely, audited annual accounts can improve internal discipline, comparability and relationships with banks, regulators and commercial partners.

The signal to other issuers matters too: reserve attestations need not be the stablecoin sector’s transparency ceiling. A credible standard would combine recurring audits, published financial statements and notes, frequent reserve disclosures, clear redemption rights and an understandable reconciliation between legal entities.

GatherHub’s inference is that the event reduces one uncertainty — whether a full audit and favourable opinion exist — while leaving a documentary uncertainty in place. That distinction avoids two opposite mistakes: treating the announcement as absolute proof of safety, or overlooking that a broader review was performed and confirmed by the auditor.

What to watch next

The immediate test is straightforward: will Tether publish its 2025 statements, notes and KPMG’s signed report? The market should then check whether the audit becomes annual, whether the same entity scope is maintained and how audited figures reconcile with more recent quarterly attestations.

Reserve composition and liquidity, related-party exposure, gold custody, investments outside the reserve pool and legal redemption terms also remain material. An unqualified opinion is a significant step. Its public value will remain incomplete until the document it accompanies can be examined.

Sources