• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Compliance Mitigation

Compliance Mitigation

Government Investigations / White Collar Crime

  • Start
  • Testimonials
  • Services
    • Investigations
    • Mitigation
    • White Collar
    • Reputation
    • Case Studies
    • Training
  • Contributors
  • Contact
  • Log In
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

SEC Sued Ripple Labs For $1.3 billion

You are here: Home / Resilience / SEC Sued Ripple Labs For $1.3 billion

April 8, 2021 By Roman

Situation

Ripple had designs to offer new digital assets for sale in the public exchange markets. The company received two legal opinions from an outside law firm confirming its ability to sell cryptocurrency without registering the assets with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Inadequate internal controls lead to significant liability the company and its founders.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of this Case Study, participants will be able to:

  • Explain how failure to properly market products and services may lead to civil liability
  • Describe ways in which a company might take additional precautions in protecting itself from accusations of fraudulent conduct
  • Understand the core concepts and concerns of the regulators applicable to interactions with the investing public
  • Identify why your business should comply with federal laws even if you personally disagree with them
  • Explain implications of civil penalties for business resulting from a federal investigation

State of the Industry

The cryptocurrency industry continues to grow rapidly. As this case study shows, cryptocurrency professionals, their lawyers, and investigators at the Securities and Exchange Commission differ in their opinions about the meaning of certain terms. When leaders begin to innovate, they should expect scrutiny from government agencies. Compliance plans may help leaders of innovative industries to protect against litigation.

Background and Analysis

This case study profiles San Francisco-based Ripple Labs, Inc. (Ripple), originally called Opencoin. This company used blockchain technology to create a new cryptocurrency that would compete with Bitcoin. As with Bitcoin, investors could exchange fiat currency (dollars) for cryptocurrency. All the information in this case study comes from four sources:  one Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) press release, one civil lawsuit filed by the SEC against Ripple, one joint letter to the judge in this case, and one newspaper article.

Congress created the SEC in the early 1930s in response to the abuses in the U.S. securities industry that led to the Great Depression. Generally, the SEC protects investors and regulates the U.S. capital markets. As part of its role, the SEC advocates for full disclosure to the public, protects investors from fraudulent and manipulative practices, and supervises and regulates certain mandatory requirements applicable to all participants in the securities industry. With the expanse of the cryptocurrency market, the SEC has weighed in on whether securities laws apply to the cryptocurrency market.

According to investigators at the SEC, and as outlined in their civil complaint against Ripple, the blockchain company created a new digital coin known as Ripple, or by its symbol, XRP. In 2012, Ripple sought legal advice on whether the company would have to register XRP as a security with the SEC.

Ripple’s lawyers apparently told the company that under certain circumstances, the SEC may consider Ripple’s XRP as an “investment contract” and therefore a security under the federal securities laws. The lawyers encouraged Ripple to register with the SEC.

The leaders of Ripple, Bradley Garlinghouse and Christian Larsen, chose not to file with the SEC. Since they did not file with the SEC, investors could not access information that the SEC considered material to investment decisions. Instead, investors only received information that Garlinghouse and Larsen chose to provide. While the leaders said they were long on Ripple’s XRP, they liquidated personal holdings valued at more than $600 million.

Besides selling XRP, the company distributed Ripple for service and labor. The recipients of the cryptocurrency, however, could only access information that the company chose to provide—rather than the type of information filed with the SEC.

The SEC sued Ripple seeking civil penalties of $1.3 billion related to Ripple’s sale of unregistered offerings in XRP over a seven-year period. The $1.3 billion in penalties represents the revenue Ripple received from the sale of XRP during those seven years.

The SEC investigation into XRP stretched to over two years. During that time, Ripple insisted that the SEC should not classify XRP as a security. Ripple premised its position on a 2015 settlement between Ripple and the SEC’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and the Justice Department. That case required Ripple to pay a $700,000 fine to settle allegations that Ripple failed to maintain a proper compliance program aimed specifically at avoiding and detecting money laundering through its securities offerings.

Recommendation

We recommend that when companies hire law firms to help them assess risk, the companies should adhere to the guidance of counsel. In this case, a failure to abide by the recommendations of the law firm has exposed many people to loss and risks. Compliance programs begin with risk assessments. They follow through with transparent documentation showing policies and procedures. Those procedures, theoretically, should protect the company.

In this case, according to the SEC complaint, the founders ignored risks. Their actions exposed investors to massive losses, and exposed the company to the potential of a criminal indictment.

These types of failures by business owners can lead to catastrophic results for smaller-sized and mid-sized businesses.

Federal investigations and civil lawsuits cost businesses hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend.

Sources

  • https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2020-338
  • https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2020/comp-pr2020-338.pdf
  • https://static.reuters.com/resources/media/editorial/20210216/secvripple–jointletter2.15.pdf
  • https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2020/12/22/sec-charges-ripple-with-selling-13-billion-in-unregistered-securities-xrp-loses-2-billion-in-market-value/?sh=1bf865897e66

Was this post helpful?

Let us know if you liked the post. That’s the only way we can improve.

Filed Under: Resilience

Compliance Mitigation Can Help You:

  • Free: Subscribe to our YouTube channel to access more than 800 videos that will help you understand more about the journey ahead. Learn strategies to succeed.
  • Free: Subscribe to our iTunes podcast to listen and learn while you drive or exercise.
  • Books: Buy books for $25 (shipping included) to learn from strategies that empowered me while I climbed through 26 years in prison, allowing me to succeed upon release (Get free digital book with any paperback purchase).
  • Courses: Enroll in our self-directed, digital courses that will help you build mitigation strategies that lead to best outcomes through judicial proceedings, sentencing, and prepare you for a successful journey through prison ($97 to $297).
  • Consulting: Collaborate with our team of mitigation experts to engineer a pathway that will help you ($400 per hour, fully refundable if you choose it’s not right for you. Learn more about our process).

Sign up to receive more information and tools.

 

Primary Sidebar

Risk Mitigation

Qualify for Non-Prosecution Agreements by showing the story of your company’s journey, and yours..

Mitigate Risk

Compliance Case Studies

1. Non-Prosecution Agreements

2. Executive Summary: Investigations

3. Defrauding Investors: SEC

4. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

5. Theranos: FDA Rules

6. Dish Networks Fraud (FTC)

7. Kickbacks Schneider Electric

8. FINRA Rules and Compliance

9. HIPPA Violations

10. Case-Study Library

11. Deferred Prosecution Agreements

Free Trial

Free 30-day trial of our courses, including Compliance 101. Avoid government investigations.

Free Sample

Mitigation Case Studies

1. Mitigation Plan

2. Learn About PSR

3. Before Sentencing

4. Attorneys and Narratives

5. Tactics to Succeed

6. Federal Sentencing Guidelines

7. Aberrant Behavior

8. Diminished Capacity

9. Federal Judge’s Advice

10. Early Release

Free Consultation

Our mitigation experts will help you engineer a strategy for success at any stage in your journey.

Book Now

Keynote Speeches

1. Pioneer Industries

2. Silicon Valley

3. California Wellness

4. Tedx Talk

5. Teaching in Prison

6. University of Washington

7. UC Berkeley

8. Executive Summary: Investigations

9. Testimonials

10. Our Story

11. Our Deck

Blog

Our Most Recent Articles

Follow

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
Compliance Mitigation - Logo
Prison Professors Story

Compliance Mitigation Story

See timeline that led to Compliance Mitigation and learn more about why you will grow stronger with the resources we provide

Learn More

Footer

Social

Follow along on social media.

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

BUSINESS

Corporate Information
Business Model
W9 Blank PDF
Independent Contractor Agreement

Contact

Compliance Mitigation / Division of Earning Freedom
32565 Golden Lantern, Suite B1026
Dana Point, CA 92629
United States
Team@ComplianceMitigation.com

Earning Freedom Properties

Prison Professors
White Collar Advice
Michael Santos Personal

Navigation

  • Start
  • Testimonials
  • Store
  • Mitigation
  • Contributors
  • Contact

Newsletter

Stay up to date by subscribing to our newsletter.
Trustpilot

Copyright © 2023 · Compliance Mitigation (an Earning Freedom company) · Privacy Policy and Terms of Use