Enterprise blockchain company Ripple has submitted its response to a request for information from the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, led by Senator Tim Scott, concerning digital asset market structure regulations.
While Ripple expressed support for establishing clear regulatory guidelines for digital assets, the company voiced significant concerns about the recently released draft market structure bill. According to Ripple, the proposed legislation creates additional confusion rather than delivering the regulatory clarity the industry desperately needs.
SEC Oversight Concerns
The blockchain firm argues that the draft bill grants excessive authority to the SEC, potentially allowing the agency to classify most tokens as traditional securities. This broad classification could encompass tokens that typically wouldn’t fall under the SEC’s regulatory jurisdiction.
Ripple specifically criticized the proposed definition of “ancillary asset,” warning that it could subject various tokens, including XRP, to indefinite SEC oversight. The company noted that tokens might remain under regulatory scrutiny simply because they were once connected to an investment contract during initial sales, even if current or future transactions don’t constitute security offerings.
💵 $XRP, $ETH, and $SOL could fall under SEC control forever@Ripple responds to the @SenateFloor crypto bill, raising major concerns:
🧬 The bill adds more confusion between the roles of #SEC and #CFTC
🧬 The term “ancillary assets” = potential regulatory overreach
🧬 Tokens… pic.twitter.com/CHIZ8tzSVa— CoinMinutes (@coinminutesnews) August 6, 2025
The current draft lacks any mechanism to eventually remove tokens from SEC oversight, creating ongoing uncertainty that could hamper innovation and development within the cryptocurrency space.
Grandfathering Proposal
Ripple is pushing for a “grandfathering” exemption that would shield tokens with established trading histories from securities regulations. The company believes that tokens which have been widely traded over extended periods should receive special consideration.
“Once a robust, liquid market has formed, it should not be disrupted by retroactive or ongoing government intervention,” Ripple stated in its response to the committee.
Regulatory Impact Assessment
The mixed reception of the draft bill reflects ongoing tensions between crypto companies and regulators over appropriate oversight frameworks. While Ripple’s criticisms highlight industry concerns about regulatory overreach, the neutral market sentiment suggests investors are taking a wait-and-see approach to potential legislative developments.
Leave a comment