Ripple backed the SEC’s Reg Crypto proposal in a comment letter, arguing that the investment contract, not the token itself, is the security. It also said oversight should end once an issuer fulfills its promises.
Why it matters
The distinction centers regulation on the relationship between an issuer’s promises and an investment contract, rather than treating a token as a security in itself. Ripple’s support puts that interpretation into the SEC’s proposal process.
Market impact
The proposal concerns a core question for crypto regulation: when securities oversight applies and when it ends. Ripple’s position adds to the debate over how regulatory clarity should apply to token issuers and their obligations.
Frequently asked questions
-
What did Ripple say is the security under the SEC proposal?
Ripple argued that the investment contract, not the token itself, is the security.
-
When does Ripple say regulatory oversight should end?
Ripple said oversight should end once an issuer fulfills its promises.
-
How did Ripple communicate its position on the proposal?
Ripple backed the SEC’s Reg Crypto proposal in a comment letter.
-
What issue does Ripple’s position put at the center of the debate?
It centers the debate on how long securities oversight applies to an issuer’s obligations.
-
Why is the distinction between a token and an investment contract relevant?
Ripple’s position ties securities status to the investment contract rather than the token itself, a distinction relevant to regulatory clarity for token projects.
TheBlock
WuBlockchain
Crypto News
CoinDesk
CryptoSlate