Back to Cases

SEC v. Ripple Labs (XRP) (2023)

Analysis ID: d0g5h47-jef6-fe5e-2f3381h858j2
Predicted Outcome
Mixed Ruling
Confidence Score: 85%
Analysis Type
Civil Case
Jurisdiction:Federal
Citations:7

Probability Distribution

Mixed - Institutional Sales Securities65%
All Sales Are Securities20%
No Sales Are Securities15%

Legal Reasoning

1

Court applies Howey Test to determine if XRP sales constitute securities transactions.

2

Institutional sales of XRP likely meet Howey criteria: investment of money, common enterprise, expectation of profits from efforts of others.

3

Programmatic sales on exchanges may not meet Howey standard as purchasers lack knowledge of Ripple's efforts.

4

Secondary market sales further removed from Ripple's promotional activities.

5

Court distinguishes between different distribution channels and purchaser expectations.

6

Ripple's marketing materials created reasonable expectation of profits for institutional buyers.

7

Lack of registration with SEC for institutional offerings violates securities laws.

Tribunal Logo

Legal Citations

15 U.S.C. § 77e - Prohibits unregistered securities sales

Statute

Makes it unlawful to sell securities unless a registration statement is in effect.

SEC v. W.J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946)

Case Law

Establishes the investment contract test for determining what constitutes a security.

SEC v. LBRY, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00260 (D.N.H. 2022)

Case Law

Recent precedent finding cryptocurrency tokens sold as securities.

Reves v. Ernst & Young, 494 U.S. 56 (1990)

Case Law

Family resemblance test for investment contracts.

SEC v. Telegram Group Inc., 448 F. Supp. 3d 352 (S.D.N.Y. 2020)

Case Law

Finds token distribution to constitute unregistered securities offering.

Counter-Arguments

  • •Ripple argues XRP is a currency/commodity like Bitcoin and Ethereum, not a security.
  • •Ripple contends purchasers bought XRP for utility (cross-border payments), not investment.
  • •Secondary market purchasers had no relationship with Ripple, negating common enterprise element.
  • •XRP existed and functioned independently of Ripple's efforts.
  • •Fair notice defense - SEC provided unclear guidance on cryptocurrency status.

What Could Flip the Verdict

  • 1.Appellate court adopts broader interpretation that all XRP transactions are securities.
  • 2.Appellate court finds no XRP sales constitute securities, treating it purely as currency.
  • 3.New regulatory framework from Congress specifically addresses cryptocurrency classification.
  • 4.Supreme Court revisits and modifies Howey Test application to digital assets.
  • 5.Additional evidence emerges showing institutional investors purchased for utility, not speculation.