Connect with us


Is XRP a security or not? Answering the dilemma that is gripping crypto space

Namrata Shukla



Is XRP a security or not? Answering the dilemma that is gripping crypto-sphere


Recently, the US Securities and Exchanges Commission’s [SEC] Chairman, in a conversation with representative Ted Budd, said that Ethereum [ETH] and similar cryptocurrencies were not subject to the securities law. This immediately gave rise to speculation on whether XRP was a security or not. This question can only be answered by addressing a larger concern, whether XRP was decentralized or not?

According to available records, XRP Ledger was formed by Jed McCaleb, Arthur Britto, and David Schwartz in 2011. In 2012, the trio approached Chris Larsen, who then joined the bandwagon. According to Hodor’s blog, the team then approached Ryan Fugger, who was responsible for the original concept behind Ripple with his credit network Rippleplay, and wanted to use their ledger on his credit network. According to the blog, Fugger and the XRP Ledger team founded a new company called Opencoin, which is now known as Ripple.

According to a BitMEX research piece, Ripple released 100 billion XRP in January 2013, out of which 80 billion was gifted to a company now called Ripple. According to the Github repository, this amount of XRP was given to Ripple “to develop the XRP ledger and its ecosystem.” Ripple claimed that they will use this 80 billion XRP to build an Internet of Value, ushering a world where money moves as fast and efficiently as information.

Decentralized or Centralized

1) Ownership

As a company which claims to use its “native XRP” for its technology, Ripple was given 80 billion XRP out of 100 billion of the total XRP created during its inception. Along with the aforementioned amount, McCaleb was given 6 billion XRP and Larsen received 9.5 billion XRP. After McCaleb’s exit from Ripple, he signed a lock-up agreement along with Britto, who reportedly received 1 billion XRP. Larsen committed to putting 7 billion XRP of his share into a charitable foundation.

In 2015, Ripple Labs held 67,510,707,349.48 XRP, while 32,488,247,336.79 was held by others. After modifying the disclosure, the reserve balance was no longer available.

For a company which claims to be decentralized, Ripple holds an abnormal portion of XRP.

2) XRP in Escrow

Out of the available XRP, Ripple committed to placing 55 billion XRP in an escrow account in 2017. The company has 55 contracts of 1 billion XRP, which expire on the first day of every month. When a contract expires, the XRP is used by the company for providing “incentives to market makers who offer tighter spreads for payments and selling XRP to institutional investors,” an article by Ripple said.

This hold reflects that there is a certain amount of control that Ripple, as a company, has in the utilization of XRP, indicating that XRP is not completely decentralized.

3) Ripple nodes

Ripple claims to not control the validators running a node in order to approve a transaction and that anyone can become a validator. However, Ripple controls 20% of the nodes and in order to approve a transaction, a majority of 80% has to be achieved, which seems fairly possible.

Even though only 20% of nodes are controlled by Ripple, the validators need to download the software for a node to operate. According to a BitMEX research report, the node operates by downloading a list of five keys from the server These five keys are assigned to and according to the software, four out of the five keys “are required to support a proposal in order for it to be accepted.” Since these keys are to be downloaded from the server, it can be argued that the company has total control over the ledger.


Mike Dudas, CEO of the publication The Block, discussed how Ripple actually met every condition of Howey’s test.

1) It is an investment of money

According to Ripple’s website, users can purchase XRP on various crypto-asset exchanges with either fiat currency or crypto-assets. This means that there is an investment of fiat currency and crypto-assets, meeting the first condition of the Howey Test.

2) There is an expectation of profit from the investment

Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer [CTO], David Schwartz, who also goes by the handle name @JoelKatz, stated in a conversation with,

“Anyone who holds XRP, particularly those who are contractually prohibited from dumping it, shares our interest in seeing the price appreciate over the long term.”

According to the document available on Ripple’s asset,

“@Ripple Labs plans to retain 25% of all $XRP issued to fund operations (and hopefully turn a profit)… as demand for $XRP grows, the value of $XRP should appreciate.”

The appreciation of the price of the token is what Howey test calls ‘an expectation of profits from the investment.’

3) The investment of money is in a common enterprise

The same document also states,

“If the @Ripple protocol becomes widely adopted, demand for $XRP may increase, leading to an increase in price. Unlike info protocols like HTTP or SMTP, investors can directly own a stake in Ripple.”

Schwartz had earlier said,

“I don’t think it’s likely $XRP would succeed w/o [@Ripple], though it’s possible. I do think it’s possible for us to succeed without XRP succeeding, as we do have other sources of revenue.”

Dudas wrote,

“When pressed on what could cause $XRP to go to $0, @JoelKatz highlights 5 factors related to @Ripple Labs, implying the price of $XRP is strongly tied to Ripple Labs’ operations, development & strategy.”

4) Any profit comes from the efforts of a promoter or third party

Ripple Labs, in a section of XRP distribution, stated,

“[@Ripple] will engage in distribution strategies that we expect will result in a stable or strengthening $XRP exchange rate against other currencies.”

Schwartz said,

“As a corporation, [@Ripple] are legally obligated to maximize shareholder value. With our current business model, that means acting to increase the value and liquidity of $XRP”



It can thus be argued that XRP comes under the category of a Security. However, Howey’s test is an ancient test to term assets as Security, and cannot be completely applicable to digital assets.

The Token Taxonomy Act while proposing to regulate the crypto market to ensure customer protection, considers Howey’s test to classify an asset as a Security. Thus, the framework and regulations for crypto must be urgently upgraded, before deciding on the Security and non-Security aspect of cryptocurrencies.

Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter


Bitcoin’s [BTC] biggest threat is its users, not governments, says’s Cobra

Febin Jose



Bitcoin’s [BTC] biggest threat is its users, not governments, says’s Cobra
Source: Pixabay

Bitcoin [BTC], the world’s largest cryptocurrency, saw a significant surge earlier this month, helping the coin break strong resistance at $5,000 and $5,200. Following the great fall of the king coin in early 2018, the Bitcoin ecosystem was struggling with scalability and technological issues, eventually leading to the hard fork.’s Cobra, who is also the co-owner of, has always maintained that Bitcoin was the cryptocurrency to look out for through his various Twitter bouts with prominent personalities in the cryptoverse. Due to his strong, unbridled support for Bitcoin, he has often trashed altcoins for their low market dominance.

In a new Twitter thread, Cobra spoke about the “biggest threat” to the Bitcoin ecosystem. Even though many crypto-enthusiasts believe that governments and technological issues were the biggest threats to the king coin, Cobra had a completely different opinion.

According to the Bitcoin maximalist, users have the potential to signal Bitcoin’s doom. His tweet read,

Source: Twitter

Source: Twitter

Though most Bitcoin supporters usually support his opinions, this tweet was met with a lot of resistance. Twitterati swarmed the thread in an attempt to prove him wrong. A user named @MrHodl alleged that this could not be true as Bitcoin had “no community.” He added that this, in turn, prevented toxicity in the ecosystem.

Cobra replied to the tweet stating,

“I think there is a community, it’s just not fully representative of everyone with a stake in Bitcoin. Most holders are quiet and not too familiar with what’s going on. There’s people with 1000+ BTC and they don’t engage at all with discussion platforms, just lurk.”

Some Twitter users took it as an attack on Bitcoin investors and opposed Cobra’s stance. A user @CarstenBKK commented,

“Maybe I am lost in translation. What do you wanna tell us? That you are part of Bitcoin network of people owning/using it, but you are just disgusted by the idea, that the network is called community in the sense of direct human collaboration and affection to the groups ideals?”

Previously, Cobra had accused Twitter’s Jack Dorsey and Square Crypto of pandering to Bitcoin users, while also suggesting that the crypto project was merely a way to bring in more users for Dorsey’s CashApp. His tweet read,

“Gotta respect how hard @sqcrypto is pandering to Bitcoiners. Very clever how @Jack has embedded himself in the community; in return the community promotes @CashApp, which gives that service a small but dedicated and activist group of early users.”

Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter

Continue Reading