Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter and CEO of Block (formerly Square), has taken issue with what he perceives as a lackluster financial commitment from Tether to support Bitcoin development. This week, Tether, the issuer behind the world’s most widely used stablecoin USDT, announced a $250,000 contribution to OpenSats, a non-profit organization that funds open-source Bitcoin developers and related projects. However, Dorsey, a vocal Bitcoin advocate and past donor to the same cause, was unimpressed.
Responding directly to Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino on social media platform X, Dorsey simply asked, “Why only $250K?” The pointed remark quickly attracted attention, especially given Dorsey’s own track record—he previously donated $21 million to OpenSats through his philanthropic initiative, signaling a much deeper financial commitment to the sustainability of the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Tether, despite being one of the most profitable firms in the cryptocurrency space, has faced criticism for the relatively modest size of its donation. In 2023 alone, the company reported a staggering $13 billion in profits. Furthermore, it is reportedly exploring a $500 billion valuation in discussions with investors, underscoring its financial clout. Critics argue that a corporation of such magnitude could afford to contribute significantly more to foundational infrastructure like Bitcoin development.
For context, OpenSats funds a variety of projects that ensure Bitcoin remains secure, decentralized, and censorship-resistant. These efforts often rely on donations, as the work is not commercially driven but essential to the long-term viability of the Bitcoin network. The disparity between Dorsey’s and Tether’s donations has reignited debates about corporate responsibility in the crypto space and how much leading firms should invest in the technology that underpins their business.
Tether defended its donation, stating that the $250,000 would directly support developers building privacy tools and other open-source Bitcoin-based technologies. The company emphasized its ongoing support for the Bitcoin ecosystem, but did not address Dorsey’s critique directly.
This incident has once again spotlighted the tension between ideology and industry profitability in the world of cryptocurrency. Dorsey, a self-proclaimed Bitcoin maximalist, has consistently pushed for open-source, decentralized development and has often criticized corporate entities for failing to uphold these values. His public rebuke suggests a broader concern that companies benefiting from Bitcoin’s infrastructure are not doing enough to ensure its long-term health and resilience.
Beyond this specific donation, the episode raises broader questions about the role of corporate stakeholders in the decentralized finance ecosystem. Should profitable companies like Tether be expected to contribute more to the open-source projects they directly or indirectly rely on? And if so, how much is enough?
Other major players in the crypto space, such as Coinbase, Kraken, and Binance, have also made contributions to support Bitcoin and blockchain development. However, the amounts and consistency of these donations vary widely. Dorsey’s comment may signal a call to action for these enterprises to reassess their philanthropic strategies and align them more closely with the values of decentralization and community support.
Furthermore, Dorsey’s pointed commentary may influence public perception of Tether and similar companies. In an industry where trust is fragile and reputations can shift overnight, appearing stingy—or disconnected from the core values of the crypto movement—can have consequences beyond a single news cycle.
The debate also underscores an evolving discussion in crypto philanthropy: should donations be proportional to a company’s profits or market impact? While any support is generally welcomed in the open-source community, symbolic donations from multi-billion-dollar companies may come off as performative rather than impactful.
Moreover, Dorsey’s criticism hints at a deeper philosophical divide—between those who see Bitcoin as a tool for financial liberation and those who treat it as a commercial asset. The former group tends to prioritize privacy, decentralization, and sustainability, while the latter often focuses on scalability, profit, and adoption. Tether, as a centralized stablecoin operator, sits at the crossroads of these worlds.
It’s also worth noting that Dorsey has a history of using his wealth to champion Bitcoin. Through his initiative, Start Small, he has funded numerous Bitcoin developers and projects, including those focused on privacy, education, and financial inclusivity. His approach contrasts sharply with companies that have yet to match their profits with equivalent community investments.
In the wake of Dorsey’s public critique, it remains to be seen whether Tether will increase its support or whether other crypto firms will respond by upping their own donations. Regardless, the conversation has cast a spotlight on the ethical and financial responsibilities of crypto giants in the development of foundational technologies.
Ultimately, Dorsey’s one-line critique—”Why only $250K?”—has sparked a necessary and timely conversation about the relationship between profit and purpose in the blockchain world. And in an open-source ecosystem dependent on community support, it may prompt more companies to put their money where their mission statements are.