American political commentator Alex Jones has raised concerns about the possible future government restrictions on XRP ownership, prompting a response from XRPL validator Vet.
The exchange followed comments Jones made during his Special LIVE Saturday Show, where he addressed a listener’s question about whether governments could take control of XRP. Vet later shared a clip of the discussion on X and offered a different view on the risks surrounding self-custodied XRP.
Alex Jones showed up to the XRP community and boy did he not disappoint!
On the clip he played on the stream, the US government can't seize XRP you hold in self custody. No one can as long as only you hold your keys, the US can't censor transactions either on the XRPL.
XRP is… https://t.co/p2oneqUDbv pic.twitter.com/V8r0I7Q2Ay
— Vet (@Vet_X0) September 5, 2026
Jones Raises Government Ownership Concerns
During the broadcast, Jones played a clip of another person discussing a hypothetical situation in which lawmakers could classify XRP as a banking asset and restrict individual ownership.
“They could very easily write something into the law that says any person who owns XRP can’t own it,” the speaker said.
The speaker cited the U.S. government’s 1933 restrictions on private gold ownership as an example of how authorities could limit privately held assets.
He also suggested that XRP holders could potentially use legal structures to protect their holdings if similar regulations were introduced. “Put it in an LLC then put that inside a trust,” he said.
The comments addressed a hypothetical regulatory scenario and did not point to any existing U.S. law that prevents individuals from owning XRP.
Vet Challenges The Confiscation Argument
Vet, an XRPL validator, posted the clip on X and disputed the idea that the U.S. government could seize XRP held through self-custody.
“The US government can’t seize XRP you hold in self-custody,” Vet wrote. He added that no one could do so “as long as only you hold your keys.”
Vet also argued that governments cannot directly censor transactions on the XRP Ledger. He pointed to the network’s open-source structure and said its value depends on users’ consensus.
He rejected the suggestion that banks exclusively control XRP, emphasizing the decentralized nature of the underlying network.
Jones Clarifies His Position
Jones later responded to Vet’s post and clarified that his comments were not intended as opposition to XRP.
“I am not against XRP! I was just responding to questions,” Jones wrote.
Vet acknowledged the clarification and said he had not accused Jones of being against XRP. He also agreed that supporting decentralized money was a valid position.
However, Vet asked Jones to remove one part of the commentary concerning government and central bank adoption of XRP. He specifically referenced Jones’s statement that governments and central banks had adopted XRP four years ago, saying that claim should be removed because it remains unverified.
We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025
Self-Custody Becomes The Main Point
The exchange ultimately centered on the difference between potential future regulation and the technical control provided by self-custody. Jones raised concerns about what lawmakers could potentially do through legislation, while Vet focused on the difficulty of directly accessing XRP when holders control their own private keys.
Neither side presented evidence that the U.S. government currently plans to prohibit individuals from owning XRP. Jones’s comments addressed a hypothetical regulatory scenario, while Vet’s response emphasized how self-custody works within the XRPL ecosystem.
The discussion continues to circulate among XRP holders on X, with the two commentators maintaining a civil exchange while presenting different views on the potential risks surrounding XRP ownership.
Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.
Follow us on X, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News
