Image credit: source

On December 22, 2020, the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (“SEC”) filed an action against Ripple Labs
Inc. (“Ripple”), Christian Larsen, the company’s
co-founder, executive chairman of its board, and former CEO; and
Bradley Garlinghouse, the company’s current CEO (together, the
“Defendants”) for conducting an unregistered securities
offering with a total value of US$1.38 billion.

The Defendants have sold over 14.6 billion units of Ripple’s
digital asset known as “XRP” to investors in the U.S. and
worldwide for cash or other considerations since the beginning of
2013.

The SEC has taken the position that XRP are “investment
contracts” and therefore securities under the Securities Act
of 1933. Because the Defendants did not view XRP to be a security,
they did not seek to register XRP with the SEC and accordingly
failed to meet the SEC’s requirements for securities offerings.
Similar to the previous
enforcement actions against Kik Interactive Inc.
, the SEC is
seeking a permanent injunction, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains,
and civil penalties against the Defendants.

This case holds implications for participants throughout the
entire crypto asset industry. Issuers of digital assets are faced
with yet another conservative interpretation of the Howey Test, a
75-year old test believed by many to be ill-suited for crypto
assets. Crypto exchanges and brokerages are left in limbo,
uncertain whether to continue supporting a popular and
well-performing asset for fear of attracting regulatory scrutiny
themselves.

Background

Ripple was founded in 2012. It developed and manages the XRP
ledger, an underlying peer-to-peer database on which the XRP tokens
operate. As a digital asset, XRP is different from Bitcoin or
Ethereum in that the latter two are minted through an ongoing
process called mining. The supply of XRP, on the other hand, was
fixed in advance at 100 billion XRP in 2012, 80 billion of which
was to be held in reserve for scheduled allotments, and the
remaining 20 billion XRP is held by individuals, including the two
executives. Since then, Ripple has gradually released XRP pursuant
to the alleged unregistered described above.

The SEC alleges that Ripple began its efforts of increasing
speculative demand and trading volume for XRP in 2013 and pursued
those efforts through multiple avenues: 1) Ripple conducted a
“Market Sale” through intermediaries who sold XRP to
public investors; 2) Ripple offered and sold XRP to at least 26
institutional investors through its “Institutional Sale”;
3) Ripple distributed and transferred XRP to third parties as
compensation, service fee, commission and incentives with no
restrictions on the resale of XRP; and 4) Ripple provided
incentives in XRP to at least 10 digital asset trading platforms
for listing XRP and meeting certain trading volume metrics.
According to the SEC, prior to the distribution, Ripple was fully
aware that XRP could be considered an “investment
contract” (thus a security) and was warned by its lawyers
regarding the risk should the SEC made such a finding.

In 2018, Ripple developed a use case for XRP – the
“On-Demand Liquidity” (ODL) product. The ODL network
enables money transmitting businesses to make cross-border payments
through XRP as an intermediary between two local fiat currencies.
Ripple issued 324 million XRP to entities associated with ODL.

XRP, sold as a “security”, for “use”, or as
“currency”?

The SEC claims XRP is a security because money was invested in a
common enterprise with a reasonable expectation of profit to be
derived from the entrepreneurial or managerial effort of others
(this analysis is commonly referred to as the “Howey
Test”, after the 1946 US Supreme Court case SEC v. W.J.
Howey Co.
). In its analysis, the SEC highlighted the following
aspects of the offering that led to the conclusion:

  • Ripple distributed XRP for cash or other considerations worth
    over 1.38 billion USD.
  • Purchasers of XRP made an investment into a common enterprise
    because the gain and loss of XRP were tied to Ripple’s success
    and failure in driving the demand and price of XRP. Ripple, as an
    entity, not only manages the public market of XRP, it also shares a
    common interest with the investors as it holds a significant amount
    of XRP and uses proceeds from XRP sale to fund its operation.
  • The Defendants promised to undertake significant efforts to
    develop, monitor, and maintain a public market and a secondary
    market for XRP with a goal to increase trading volume and resale
    opportunities. The Defendants made repeated public statements
    highlighting its business development effort that will drive
    demand, adoption and liquidity of XRP.
  • Ripple held itself out as the primary source of information
    regarding XRP. These efforts led investors to reasonably expect
    that Ripple’s entrepreneurial and managerial effort would drive
    the success or failure of Ripple’s XRP Project.

After concluding that XRP is an investment contract under the
Howey Test, the SEC further argued XRP is not sold for its utility
function within the ODL network. According to the SEC, ODL was not
commercially available until 2018, and even after its launch,
usages of XRP by money transmitters were heavily incentivized by
Ripple. XRP was sold and traded in an amount that “far exceeds
any potential use of XRP as a medium to transfer value”.
Furthermore, the SEC denied the possibility that XRP as
“currency” because “using XRP as a ‘bridge’
between two real fiat currencies does not bestow legal tender
status on XRP”.

The SEC also alleged that Ripple manually controlled XRP’s
trading activity by “selectively disclosing information”
to investors. The SEC further alleges that Ripple manipulated the
price and liquidity of XRP to maximize the amount of money Ripple
could raise.

Implications and Impact

This lawsuit marks another high-profile case in the SEC’s
continued enforcement activities against unregistered offerings of
crypto tokens. XRP is among the top five most traded cryptocurrency
with a market cap of $12.1 billion.1. Different from
other digital tokens, XRP is held by a large number of
institutional investors and money transmitters like banks.
According to Ripple’s CEO Brad Garlinghouse, who is also a
defendant to the complaint, Ripple will fight back and “prove
their case in the court.”2. Garlinghouse argued the
legal action against the XRP is “an assault on crypto at
large” and will have a “snowball effect” on the
industry as a whole.3.

Crypto-asset exchange platforms like CoinDesk have delisted XRP
pending the result of this litigation. Given the regulatory
uncertainty, Ripple is also considering moving its headquarters
outside the US to a country that does not consider XRP as a
security.

Industry participants who hold XRP or have business dealing in
XRP should proceed with caution and re-evaluate the potential
implications of the SEC succeeding with this lawsuit. Industry
participants who seek to deal exclusively in assets that are not
securities might find themselves subject to securities regulatory
requirements in the event the lawsuit is determined in favour of
the SEC.

We will continue to monitor the development of this case and
encourage issuers and stakeholders to consult advisors and
securities commissions for further guidance.

Footnotes

1. CoinMarketCap as of Jan 25: https://coinmarketcap.com/

2. https://ripple.com/insights/the-secs-attack-on-crypto-in-the-united-states/

3. ibid.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.

(Excerpt) Read more Here | 2021-01-28 03:31:25

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.