Skip to content

Ripple pitches XRP as an intermediary to connect different CBDCs amid the SEC lawsuit.

Ripple has achieved the "strongest year ever" despite the lawsuit over XRP by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SE
Ripple has achieved the “strongest year ever” despite the lawsuit over XRP by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Ripple Labs has recently released a whitepaper pitching the XRP ledger as an intermediary to connect different central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) amid the SEC lawsuit. ‘The Future of CBDCs’ touts XRP as a neutral bridge that efficiently provides intermediation between different currencies. Ripple claims that if the CBDCs interacted with each other, commercial companies could do international business more easily.

Ripple states the importance of cross-border transfers.

Cross-border payments with CBDCs are receiving little attention from central banks. The firm stated that adding it is a “short-sighted” stance as interoperable CBDCs could bring nations a competitive advantage. “Supporting immediate real-time foreign exchanges, as opposed to the current 3-5 day process, will likely still require the need for pre-funded currency accounts”, Ripple states in the white paper. It is unclear if Ripple Labs is addressing central banks with its white paper as a way to put pressure on the ongoing legal battle with the SEC. Either way, central banks may also hesitate to work with Ripple at this particular time.

The legal battle between the U.S. SEC and San Francisco-based blockchain payments firm Ripple Labs has continued to heat up. In the latest turn of the events, the SEC has moved in court to stop Ripple executives’ motion to deny it access to their personal financial records. The SEC had issued subpoenas to six banks that current and former CEOs, Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen, have been using since 2013. Ripple Labs has failed to prove why the SEC shouldn’t access the records, the financial watchdog argues. It stated in its motion, “The party resisting discovery must show why the requests are not proper and cannot do so with general and conclusory objections as to relevance, overbreadth, or burden.”