Feds Seek $456,602 in Tether Tied to Multi-State Romance Scam

Federal prosecutors in Massachusetts filed a civil forfeiture action on Nov. 9 seeking $456,602 in Tether (USDT) tied to two seized wallets, according to a complaint in an alleged romance scam that touched three states.

The filing, submitted by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts, alleges that victims in Massachusetts, Ohio and California were first drawn into online relationships and then steered toward fraudulent cryptocurrency investment platforms. Those platforms displayed fictitious profits while the victims' money moved through crypto wallets, prosecutors allege.

The scammers did not work under their real names. According to the complaint, the individuals who contacted victims used aliases including Shreya Patel, Eric and Lily.

How much did victims lose?

One victim stands out in the filing. A resident of Norwood, Massachusetts, reported losses of roughly $1.89 million across 26 separate transactions. Each transfer followed the same pattern: money in, fake gains displayed on screen, and no way to withdraw.

That figure dwarfs the amount the government is now trying to seize, which suggests the recovered wallets represent only a slice of the alleged fraud's total flow.

This is not the Justice Department's first move of this kind. In March 2026, prosecutors pursued a similar case, seeking 327,829.72 USDT connected to a Massachusetts resident. Together, the two actions point to a sustained enforcement focus on pig-butchering-style schemes that use stablecoins to move proceeds.

What does civil forfeiture actually mean here?

Civil forfeiture is an action against property, not a criminal conviction against a person. The $456,602 in USDT is itself the defendant in this case.

For the government to take final ownership of the funds, it needs one of three outcomes:

• a judgment from a court,
• an agreed settlement, or
• a default judgment, entered when no party contests the claim.

Until then, the Tether sits in seized wallets, frozen but not yet forfeited. If a claimant came forward and could show a legitimate interest in the funds, the action could be contested.

Why does the stablecoin detail matter?

The case is a small but telling example of how law enforcement now treats crypto proceeds as seizable assets, no different from bank accounts or cars. Tether on a blockchain leaves a record. Investigators can trace wallet-to-wallet movement, seize the keys through court process, and convert the tokens once forfeiture is final.

For the victims, recovery remains uncertain and slow. The Norwood victim alone lost nearly four times the total being forfeited across the entire case.

The next milestone is procedural: unless a claimant contests the action, the court can enter a default judgment and the funds move to federal custody. Watch the docket, because that filing will signal whether anyone intends to fight for the seized Tether.