Ripple

Ripple is a financial technology company that builds fast, low-cost global payment systems for banks and other financial institutions. Its associated digital asset, XRP, is used to move money across borders quickly and cheaply. Unlike Bitcoin, XRP is not mined; it is a pre-issued digital asset designed specifically for payments, with Ripple positioned as a core corporate steward of its ecosystem.

On paper, Ripple sells itself as a bridge between traditional finance and the future of money. In practice, its recent behavior shows a company using that position to court political power and push the boundaries of financial regulation—aligning itself with the Trump political project while fighting, and partially losing, a high-profile case brought by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Major Crypto Donations to the Trump–Vance Inaugural Fund

In the 2024–2025 cycle, Ripple emerged as one of the largest crypto-industry financial backers of Donald Trump’s return to power. Multiple reports indicate that Ripple pledged approximately $5 million worth of XRP to the Trump–Vance Inaugural Committee for the January inauguration celebrations. Coverage from BeInCrypto, Bitcoinist, and The Crypto Basic place Ripple’s donation at around $4.9–$5 million in XRP, making it one of the largest single crypto contributions to the fund.

Across the industry, crypto donors contributed an estimated $18 million to Trump’s inaugural fund, with Ripple cited as a leading or top donor in that group. Reporting from The Block also notes Ripple’s financial support for a Trump-linked White House Ballroom initiative, further deepening the company’s association with Trump’s political and ceremonial infrastructure.

These are not neutral “industry advocacy” contributions—they are targeted, high-dollar bets on a specific political figure and administration. For customers, investors, and everyday users of XRP, this means Ripple is actively using its resources to bolster Trump’s political ascent and the policy agenda that comes with it.

The SEC vs. Ripple: Unregistered Securities and Regulatory Boundaries

Ripple’s political ambitions unfold alongside a major regulatory clash with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. On December 22, 2020, the SEC filed a formal complaint against Ripple Labs Inc. and two key executives—co-founder Christian A. Larsen and CEO Bradley Garlinghouse—alleging they raised more than $1.3 billion through an unregistered securities offering of XRP. The original complaint is detailed in the SEC’s December 2020 press release.

The SEC’s central argument was that Ripple’s sales of XRP, particularly to institutional investors via contracts and structured deals, constituted an “investment contract” under the Howey test—meaning XRP, in those contexts, functioned as a security. Buyers, according to the SEC, were investing money in a common enterprise with a reasonable expectation of profits tied to Ripple’s efforts to develop and promote the XRP ecosystem. Analyses of the case and its implications are summarized by LegalClarity, Cointelegraph, and Investopedia.

Ripple’s defense framed XRP as a digital currency or utility token rather than a security, arguing that many XRP transactions—especially on public exchanges—did not meet the Howey standard. The case became one of the most closely watched legal fights in crypto, seen as a bellwether for how U.S. regulators might treat digital assets more broadly.

The Split Ruling: Institutional vs. Retail Sales

In July 2023, the court issued a nuanced, split decision. In key findings:

• Institutional sales of XRP—large, negotiated sales to institutional investors—were found to be unregistered securities offerings in violation of federal law.
• Programmatic sales and public exchange trades of XRP—those occurring on the open market and not tied to specific investment contracts—were held not to be securities offerings under the Howey test.

This distinction—between institutional, contract-based sales versus open-market retail trading—now stands as a major precedent in digital-asset regulation. A detailed breakdown of the ruling and subsequent developments appears in the court filings and commentaries, including the Justia case docket.

Final Judgment and End of the Litigation

On August 7, 2024, a final judgment ordered Ripple to pay a civil penalty of $125,035,150 and enjoined the company from further violations of the registration provisions of the Securities Act of 1933. The SEC detailed this outcome in a litigation release, confirming both the financial penalty and the ongoing compliance obligations imposed on Ripple.

In 2025, the SEC and Ripple jointly moved to dismiss their respective appeals, effectively ending the litigation and leaving the split ruling in place: institutional XRP sales treated as securities offerings, and public exchange sales not. This outcome gives Ripple partial legal clarity—but with a documented finding that some of its past business practices violated securities laws and required a nine-figure penalty to resolve.

Bottom Line

Ripple is not just a neutral “plumbing” provider for global payments. It is a politically active corporation that:

• Makes some of the largest crypto-industry donations to Donald Trump’s inaugural fund and related Trump-linked projects.
• Has been found liable for unregistered institutional securities offerings of XRP and ordered to pay more than $125 million in civil penalties.
• Operates at the edge of financial regulation while seeking influence with political leaders who can shape that regulatory landscape in its favor.

For people deciding where to put their money, talent, or technical support, Ripple’s record is clear: it has chosen to channel its resources toward Trump’s political infrastructure while pushing legal boundaries in how it raises and markets capital. That is not a neutral payments company—it is a political and financial actor using its technology, its token, and its war chest to expand both profit and power.