Key Highlights
- Ripple, Ripple Prime (formerly Hidden Road), and law firm Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP met the SEC Crypto Task Force on March 20, 2026, to discuss the regulation of crypto assets under existing broker-dealer rules.
- The agenda focused on aligning stablecoin treatment under net capital (Rule 15c3-1) and customer protection (Rule 15c3-3) rules, proposing that stablecoins be treated as cash substitutes rather than securities.
- Ripple asked the SEC whether industry-wide guidance or firm-specific no-action relief is the preferred path forward, pushing for scalable regulatory frameworks over piecemeal solutions.
Ripple Labs, its institutional prime brokerage arm Ripple Prime (formerly Hidden Road), and law firm Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP met with the SEC’s Crypto Task Force staff on March 20, 2026.
The meeting was aimed at discussing approaches to addressing issues related to the regulation of crypto assets, according to a memorandum published on the SEC’s website. It was accompanied by a detailed document submitted by Ripple, which outlined a six-point proposed agenda.
The agenda covered stablecoin treatment under broker-dealer rules, digital asset custody standards, stablecoin collateral eligibility, regulatory ambiguities around tokenized securities, and the preferred path for broader regulatory guidance.
What triggered the meeting?
Ripple’s meeting request, dated March 3, 2026, was filed in direct response to two recent SEC developments. The first was Commissioner Hester Peirce’s public invitation to hear from market participants in her statement titled “Cutting by Two Would Do.” The second was the Division of Trading and Markets’ February 19, 2026, FAQ on payment stablecoins under the net capital rule, which allowed payment stablecoins to be held with a 2% haircut under certain conditions.
While Ripple acknowledged that the February 19 FAQ provides “some clarity in the short term,” the company signaled that broader alignment is still needed — particularly on how payment stablecoins are treated under both the net capital rule (Rule 15c3-1) and the customer protection rule (Rule 15c3-3).
Stablecoins as cash, not securities
A central theme of Ripple’s agenda was the argument that qualifying payment stablecoins should be treated as cash substitutes rather than securities under broker-dealer regulations. The company emphasized that stablecoins serve as the primary on/off ramp for digital asset activity and are a critical source of market liquidity, making their regulatory treatment foundational to how digital asset markets operate.
On collateral eligibility, Ripple proposed that payment stablecoins meeting the FAQ’s definition should qualify as eligible collateral for broker-dealer purposes. The company further argued that haircuts on qualifying stablecoins should be calibrated to reflect the risk profile of short-dated U.S. government debt, citing what it described as equivalent liquidity and credit characteristics.
Custody standards for Digital Assets
Ripple dedicated a significant portion of its agenda to custody standards for both firm-owned and client assets. The company proposed that broker-dealers should be permitted to use self-custody or custody at a regulated digital asset custodian as compliant alternatives for proprietary digital assets.
For client assets protected under Rule 15c3-3, Ripple argued that holdings at federally chartered digital asset banks should satisfy customer protection requirements, consistent with relief the SEC has already granted to investment funds under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Ripple specifically asked the Commission whether existing custody relief available to 1940 Act funds should be extended to broker-dealers, and if so, under what terms.
Tokenized securities: Three categories, one question
The most technically detailed portion of the agenda addressed tokenized securities. Ripple argued that where tokenized securities carry the same economic and counterparty risks as their traditional equivalents, existing SEC rules should apply consistently.
However, the company raised a key open question for the Commission: whether the net capital and customer protection rules should treat three distinct types of tokenized securities differently — synthetic tokenized securities, custodial tokenized securities, and issuer-sponsored tokenized securities — and if so, on what basis.
Ripple noted that fragmented legal interpretations across these categories are currently impeding market development and called for high-level SEC guidance that would provide a more reliable and scalable foundation for the tokenized securities market.
Who attended the meeting?
The Ripple delegation included six representatives spanning trading, legal, policy, structuring, and finance functions across both Ripple and Ripple Prime:
- Roberto Verrillo – Trading and Markets, Ripple
- Roger Versluys – Structuring, Ripple Prime
- Jack Knecht – Broker-Dealer CFO, Ripple Prime
- Hina Mehta – Legal, Ripple Prime
- Sam Dreiman – Policy, Ripple
- James Brady – Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
The composition of the delegation — with Ripple Prime’s broker-dealer CFO and legal counsel present alongside Ripple’s policy lead and external counsel — reflects the operational specificity of the issues raised, particularly around net capital calculations and customer protection mechanics.
Why this meeting matters now
The meeting took place just three days after the SEC and CFTC jointly issued a landmark interpretive release on March 17, 2026, that classified 16 major crypto assets — including XRP — as digital commodities rather than securities. That 68-page guidance established a five-part taxonomy for crypto assets (digital commodities, digital collectibles, digital tools, stablecoins, and digital securities) and marked a historic shift in U.S. digital asset oversight.
For Ripple, the commodity classification of XRP effectively resolved the central question that had defined the company’s years-long legal battle with the SEC, which began in December 2020. Stuart Alderoty, Ripple’s Chief Legal Officer, responded to the March 17 guidance by stating that Ripple always knew XRP was not a security and that the SEC has now made clear what it is: a digital commodity.
With XRP’s classification settled, Ripple’s regulatory engagement has shifted from defending its token’s status to proactively shaping the operational rules governing stablecoins, tokenized securities, and digital asset custody within the existing securities framework.
Ripple’s expanding regulatory footprint
In the meeting document, Ripple highlighted its extensive regulatory credentials to establish credibility with the Task Force. The company’s subsidiaries, including Ripple Prime entities, hold over 75 global financial services licenses, including a Commission-registered broker-dealer, a CFTC-registered futures commission merchant, money transmitter licenses in most U.S. states, a virtual currency license from the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS), and a NYDFS limited-purpose trust charter.
Most notably, Ripple disclosed that in December 2025, it received conditional approval for the Ripple National Trust Bank in Organization — a national entity purpose-built to manage stablecoin reserves under the highest standards of prudential supervision.
Ripple Prime, which was formed after Ripple’s $1.25 billion acquisition of Hidden Road in 2025, operates as the first crypto company-owned global, multi-asset prime broker. It offers institutions clearing, prime brokerage, and financing across FX, digital assets, derivatives, swaps, and fixed income.
Ripple’s ongoing engagement with Crypto Task Force
This is not Ripple’s first interaction with the SEC’s Crypto Task Force. Ripple Labs previously met with the Task Force on May 20, 2025, and submitted formal written input on January 9, 2026, where the company advocated for a shift from subjective decentralization tests to a rights-based regulatory framework for determining whether a crypto asset falls under securities law.
What comes next?
In the final agenda item, Ripple asked the SEC to clarify its preferred path for regulatory clarity, whether through industry-wide guidance or firm-specific no-action relief, considering the trade-offs and timelines of each approach. The company affirmed its commitment to continued engagement with the SEC as rules and market practices evolve.
The meeting adds to a growing list of Crypto Task Force engagements in 2026, as the SEC continues to receive input from major industry players, including SIFMA, JPMorgan, Coinbase, BlackRock, and others, on how to operationalize the rapidly evolving regulatory framework for digital assets.
Also Read: Coin Center Urges SEC to Prioritize Crypto Rulemaking
