A new claim made by crypto researcher Darkhorse has reignited discussions over whether Ripple Labs is quietly circumventing a federal court injunction that prevents it from directly selling XRP to institutions.
The claims have sparked a heated debate within the cryptocurrency community, as some analysts argue Ripple has found a way to continue selling its tokens without breaching the injunction, while others assert that Ripple's actions are simply part of the ongoing evolution of the market.
On June 4, Darkhorse took to X to publicly suggest that Ripple has found a legal and "clean" way to bypass the injunction. According to him, Ripple’s new setup, which involves a $300 million XRP treasury managed by Webus International Ltd., an Asia-based mobility company, allows the company to continue distributing XRP indirectly.
In his post, Darkhorse argued that this “new treasury setup” enables Ripple to operate within the law by using an intermediary, rather than selling directly to institutional buyers.
The Setup Behind the Allegation
The core of Darkhorse’s argument is based on Ripple’s use of a regulated intermediary - in this case, an SEC-registered investment adviser named Samara Alpha. According to Webus’s Form 6-K filing, this new treasury model delegates the management of up to $300 million in XRP to Samara Alpha, which then allocates the tokenized assets to Webus, a corporate client.
Darkhorse asserts that this structure allows Ripple to sell XRP without violating the injunction, which specifically bars Ripple from selling directly to institutional investors without SEC approval.
Darkhorse explains that the XRP Treasury model involves a more indirect route, allowing Ripple to maintain compliance by routing XRP through regulated financial intermediaries, like Samara Alpha, who are subject to the scrutiny of U.S. regulators. This setup, he argues, is a “compliant by design” structure, circumventing Ripple’s legal restrictions while still enabling the company to offload its XRP holdings.
“Ripple is enjoined from direct institutional sales without SEC clearance,” Darkhorse stated. “The workaround? Sell to regulated intermediaries (like Samara on behalf of Webus) with treasury agreements that are SEC-transparent and non-retail facing. It’s structured - not casual.”
Ripple’s Response
Jay Nisbett, a long-time XRP commentator, pushed back against Darkhorse’s assertion, insisting that this setup is not a clever “workaround” but rather a natural step toward institutional adoption. Nisbett argued that Webus is not in any official partnership with Ripple and that Webus is simply acquiring XRP in the same manner any market participant would, i.e., through secondary market purchases.
In his view, Webus’s XRP holdings are nothing more than “passive custody,” not a maneuver to evade legal restrictions.
Nisbett further contended that the SEC ruling on XRP clarified that the asset is not a security in this context, and therefore, holding XRP does not automatically trigger a securities transaction.
For Nisbett, the decision to route the token through an SEC-registered intermediary is simply part of the market's natural evolution in response to regulatory hurdles, not a deliberate attempt to bypass legal frameworks.
The Counterclaim: Webus’s XRP Treasury is More Than Just Custody
Darkhorse responded sharply to Nisbett’s claims, reiterating that the creation of the $300 million XRP Treasury was not a casual purchase of tokens but rather a structured financial instrument designed to navigate legal boundaries. He highlighted that Webus did not merely file an intent to buy XRP on the open market. Instead, the Form 6-K filing specifically detailed the creation of an XRP treasury managed by a regulated entity.
Darkhorse pointed out that this method is designed to distance Ripple from any direct sales of XRP to institutions, protecting the company from further regulatory scrutiny.
He emphasized that the XRP Treasury structure was not just for holding assets on a balance sheet but for deploying them as part of a treasury management strategy. The fact that Webus uses a delegated, SEC-facing manager like Samara Alpha indicates that Ripple is navigating the institutional risk associated with XRP’s legal status.
This, Darkhorse argues, shows that Ripple is keenly aware of the legal complexities surrounding the sale of XRP and is taking steps to operate within those constraints.
Ripple’s Legal Challenges: The Ongoing Fight with the SEC
Ripple’s legal saga with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has been ongoing for years, and the company’s legal challenges continue to shape its operations. The permanent injunction issued by Judge Torres in 2024 prohibits Ripple from selling XRP directly to institutions unless the sales are registered with the SEC. This injunction has placed Ripple in a difficult position, as the company’s revenue largely relies on the sale of XRP.
Despite Ripple’s claims of XRP’s status as a non-security, the SEC continues to challenge the company, stating that the token is subject to securities regulations. The latest development has led some to speculate that Ripple is taking advantage of legal loopholes, or alternatively, some view it as a natural market progression toward regulated crypto finance.
In the absence of clarity from the SEC, Ripple has been exploring ways to work within the confines of the law without stalling its operations. This includes selling XRP through institutional intermediaries that have regulatory clearance, as seen with the new treasury model.
Will This Strategy Pass Regulatory Scrutiny?
The success of Ripple’s strategy largely hinges on how regulators view these new mechanisms. While Ripple’s legal team may feel confident in this new structure, the SEC and other regulators may take a different view. The agency has historically sought to regulate cryptocurrency sales involving institutional investors, and Ripple’s workaround might be scrutinized for any potential violations of existing securities laws.
Further complicating matters, the ongoing legal battle over XRP’s status could lead to additional court orders that either restrict or expand Ripple’s ability to sell XRP to institutional buyers. Ripple’s future could hinge on whether the SEC takes action against the new treasury model or accepts it as a legitimate workaround.
Amid these legal uncertainties, XRP has remained relatively resilient in the market, with the token trading at $2.1989 at press time. Despite legal challenges, the token has continued to see interest from both retail and institutional investors, partly due to its growing adoption within the crypto community.
However, any potential legal moves by the SEC against Ripple’s treasury strategy could lead to market volatility for XRP, as investors weigh the risks involved in the ongoing regulatory battles. The token’s price and overall market perception will likely continue to be influenced by developments in Ripple’s fight with the SEC.
Ripple’s alleged workaround through a newly created XRP Treasury managed by Samara Alpha and Webus is a bold attempt to navigate the complexities of the SEC’s injunction. While some see it as a legal and compliant strategy to continue distributing XRP, others argue that this setup could be a backdoor for circumventing restrictions placed on the company.