Ripple CTO's strong response to the IMF report and allegations regarding XRP!

Is XRP a security? This question has been a topic of debate for years.

In the lawsuit filed by the SEC, it claims that XRP is a security, while in the ruling given by Judge Analisa Torres in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, a dual distinction was made.

The court stated that Ripple’s institutional sales constituted an unregistered securities offering, but the sales made to retail investors on cryptocurrency exchanges were not considered securities.

Finally, after the SEC’s move to withdraw the Ripple case, experts noted that doubts about XRP being a security have been cleared, while the IMF indirectly argued in a recent report that XRP is a security.

International Monetary Fund (IMF) published the first update of the Balance of Payments and International Investment Guidelines since 2009 last week, and cryptocurrencies were also included in the framework.

The IMF’s new Balance of Payments Guidance (BPM7)*** classifies crypto assets according to whether they impose a financial demand or obligation on the issuer, suggesting that, in general, altcoins are debt-burdened securities.

The IMF argues that Bitcoin does not impose a liability due to its mining process, while suggesting that the tokens known as altcoins generally do impose a liability.

Following the IMF’s decision to make this distinction, some users commented that “XRP is being listed permanently as a security”.

In response to these comments, Ripple’s CTO David Schwartz stated that XRP does not fit the definition of a utility token, but if it did, Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) would also fall under this definition.

“If XRP is a utility token that you can use to pay transaction fees in the future, or according to the IMF, a security, then so are BTC and ETH.”