IMF Digital Asset Classification Triggers Fresh Scrutiny on XRP Status

The International Monetary Fund has introduced a new classification framework for digital assets, bringing global attention to the legal and financial standing of tokens like XRP. According to the IMF, digital currencies without associated liabilities, such as Bitcoin, are categorized as capital assets. Meanwhile, stablecoins that carry financial backing fall under the category of financial instruments.

The guidelines define cross-border crypto transactions as capital account activities involving acquisitions or sales of non-derivative assets. Ethereum Solana and protocol-based tokens function similarly to equity assets if foreign entities hold them. Market observers and digital asset communities have shown special interest in a particular clause regarding utility tokens.

The IMF describes utility tokens as assets that come with a financial claim against a known counterparty, usually to access goods or services. The XRP community expresses uncertainty about this particular clause. Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer David Schwartz spoke about the concern by querying if any prominent digital asset matches this definition. According to his analysis, the IMF’s logic enables multiple current tokens to become interchangeable.

According to Schwartz, Bitcoin and Ethereum must be classified similarly if XRP qualifies as a utility token because it can be used for transaction fees. This interpretation, he said, weakens the reliability of the framework. The conversation intensified with Ripple’s recent announcement of RLUSD, a stablecoin set to compete in a growing market estimated to exceed $2.8 trillion.

Also Read: Big News For XRP: Price May Skyrocket Soon, Here’s Why

Ripple’s RLUSD Launch Raises Concerns Over XRP’s Regulatory Role

Ripple’s entry into the stablecoin space with RLUSD adds a new dimension to the ongoing debate over XRP’s legal classification. Some industry voices have speculated that RLUSD might better match the IMF’s definition of a utility token than XRP itself. This possibility has led to increased scrutiny of XRP’s use case and long-term role within Ripple’s ecosystem.

The IMF framework implies that any token promising access to goods or services from an issuer might be labeled a utility token. If applied strictly, this could reshape the categorization of many digital assets in circulation. However, Schwartz pushed back against such interpretations, noting that using this rule evenly would create inconsistencies across the industry.

Ripple’s stablecoin initiative highlights the company’s broader strategy to diversify beyond XRP. Despite this, XRP remains central to many of Ripple’s cross-border solutions, leaving questions about its regulatory future unresolved.

Conclusion

The IMF’s updated digital asset classification has reignited the conversation around XRP’s legal status. Ripple’s rollout of RLUSD adds further complexity, especially as global regulators look to frameworks like the IMF’s for guidance. For now, the debate continues, with XRP’s classification still uncertain.

Also Read: Why Has The SEC Not Dismissed Ripple Lawsuit in Official Statement – Case Still Alive?

The post IMF Digital Asset Classification Triggers Fresh Scrutiny on XRP Status appeared first on 36Crypto.