HTX denied sending unexplained USDT transfers after users reported small deposits on August 18 and, in some cases, account reviews or restrictions. On-chain activity cited in the reports showed recurring transfers of 3 to 10 USDT, often close together in time.
Several transactions carried an ‘HTX’ wallet label, but that label alone does not establish who controlled the sending addresses. HTX said its initial internal review found no transfers or tests from official channels and opened an investigation into the transactions.
The deposits followed a repeated pattern, with similar amounts appearing within closely grouped periods. That pattern differed from the typical exchange withdrawals described in the reports. The repeated timing also increased attention around whether one source could connect the transactions.
Some users said receiving exchanges reviewed their accounts soon after the funds arrived. One reported case involved a 7.5 USDT deposit into a Coinbase account. The recipient then received a request to explain the source of the funds.
A request for information does not prove that an exchange froze an account. Coinbase has not publicly addressed the reported case. Could inaccurate wallet attribution alone explain why some transfers carried an HTX label?
HTX said none of its official platforms initiated the deposits. It also denied that any testing program connected to the exchange sent the transactions. The exchange said its review had not found related activity from official channels.
Instead, HTX said it is examining address tagging and on-chain source identification. Matching transaction hashes, sender addresses, and recipient cases could help determine whether a single source connects the incidents. Repeated funding links could also clarify control of the sending wallets.
If transaction history showed HTX controlled the sending addresses, the exchange's denial would face greater scrutiny. If labels or attribution methods proved incorrect, those errors could explain why some transactions carried the HTX identifier.
Some users described the activity as ‘address poisoning,’ while others reported account restrictions after receiving funds. No transaction record, platform notice, or blockchain security finding has independently confirmed either description. HTX said it would not speculate before completing its investigation.
Also Read: UK Sanctions HTX as Russia Crypto Evasion Probe Expands Globally
Reports cited a UK asset freeze and payment restriction involving HTX-linked activities dated May 26. They also cited an EU prohibitive transaction ban scheduled for August 23. Those dates placed the reported August 18 transfers within a period of heightened compliance attention.
That backdrop could cause receiving exchanges to examine even small transfers that appeared linked to HTX. In such reviews, the apparent source of funds may matter more than the transfer size. The reported deposits ranged from only 3 to 10 USDT.
Still, proof of wallet ownership remains necessary before linking individual account restrictions directly to HTX. No affected user has published a complete platform notice showing a permanent restriction tied to one transfer. HTX promised confirmed information after its investigation but set no deadline.
HTX has denied sending the small USDT deposits and says its official channels conducted no related testing. The dispute now centers on who controlled the sending wallets and whether labels caused false attribution. Transaction records, exchange notices, and HTX’s pending investigation remain the key sources for confirming what happened.