<p>You can use it as many times as you like. There is no upper limit.</p>

<p>The reason that people advocate using new addresses is that it increases anonymity. For example, people who know your address can easily look up how much has been sent to it in total. See these questions for some more info on anonymity:</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/52/how-anonymous-are-bitcoin-transactions">How anonymous are Bitcoin transactions?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/439/how-can-one-remain-relatively-anonymous-while-using-bitcoin">How can one remain relatively anonymous while using Bitcoin?</a></li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-10-01T07:35:24.847Z
2011-10-01T07:43:11.197Z
2017-04-13T12:47:32.940Z
D.H.
<p>Though there is no limit on the number of transaction received, you might run into trouble when you try to spend the bitcoins that you've received. As <a href="https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#How_much_will_the_transaction_fee_be.3F" rel="nofollow">stated here</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Because the fee is related to the amount of data that makes up the
  transaction and not to the amount of bitcoins being sent, the fee may
  seem extremely low (0.0005 BTC for a 1,000 BTC transfer) or unfairly
  high (0.004 BTC for a 0.02 BTC payment, or about 20%). If you are
  receiving tiny amounts (e.g., as small payments from a mining pool)
  then fees when sending will be higher than if your activity follows a
  more normal consumer or business transaction pattern.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Others have mentioned that there is no need for a transaction fee to be paid, though you might have to wait a little longer for your transaction to be included in a block (DeepBit was given as an example). However, I've also heard that the Bitcoin Client application (older versions anyway) specifies a minimum transaction fee, which seems to be supported by the above quoted text.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-10-01T08:29:23.837Z
I don't see how it matters in this case whether you have received a lot of small transactions to _one_ address or a lot of small transactions to _multiple_ addresses. The transaction fee problem is there anyway. The questions is about whether there are any specific problems in receiving a lot of transactions to the same address.
D.H.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-10-01T09:16:37.690Z
Agreed, but the extra detail is important to mention.
Highly Irregular
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-10-01T08:14:16.777Z
2011-10-01T08:14:16.777Z
Highly Irregular
<p>The pool I am with has sent about twenty transactions to one address I gave as a 'send to' addy. Could this one address just go on and on taking more and more of these transactions? A hundred of them? Ten thousand?</p>

<transactions><wallet><address>
Is there a recommended maximum number of transactions any one address should ever receive?
user189
# Is there a recommended maximum number of transactions any one address should ever receive?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2011-10-01)

The pool I am with has sent about twenty transactions to one address I gave as a 'send to' addy. Could this one address just go on and on taking more and more of these transactions? A hundred of them? Ten thousand?

**Tags:** transactions, wallet, address


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2011-10-01. Score: 8

You can use it as many times as you like. There is no upper limit.

The reason that people advocate using new addresses is that it increases anonymity. For example, people who know your address can easily look up how much has been sent to it in total. See these questions for some more info on anonymity:

* [How anonymous are Bitcoin transactions?](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/52/how-anonymous-are-bitcoin-transactions)
* [How can one remain relatively anonymous while using Bitcoin?](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/439/how-can-one-remain-relatively-anonymous-while-using-bitcoin)


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2011-10-01. Score: 5

Though there is no limit on the number of transaction received, you might run into trouble when you try to spend the bitcoins that you've received. As [stated here](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#How_much_will_the_transaction_fee_be.3F):

> Because the fee is related to the amount of data that makes up the
> transaction and not to the amount of bitcoins being sent, the fee may
> seem extremely low (0.0005 BTC for a 1,000 BTC transfer) or unfairly
> high (0.004 BTC for a 0.02 BTC payment, or about 20%). If you are
> receiving tiny amounts (e.g., as small payments from a mining pool)
> then fees when sending will be higher than if your activity follows a
> more normal consumer or business transaction pattern.

Others have mentioned that there is no need for a transaction fee to be paid, though you might have to wait a little longer for your transaction to be included in a block (DeepBit was given as an example). However, I've also heard that the Bitcoin Client application (older versions anyway) specifies a minimum transaction fee, which seems to be supported by the above quoted text.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I don't see how it matters in this case whether you have received a lot of small transactions to _one_ address or a lot of small transactions to _multiple_ addresses. The transaction fee problem is there anyway. The questions is about whether there are any specific problems in receiving a lot of transactions to the same address.  
> **username_2**: Agreed, but the extra detail is important to mention.  

---

