Prominent Australian legal expert and XRP advocate Bill Morgan has issued a sharp rebuttal to the persistent belief that Ripple’s escrow system is being used to suppress XRP prices by systematically dumping tokens on retail investors.
In a recent thread on X, Morgan cited both historical data and regulatory findings to dismantle what he labeled the “moronic escrow dump theory.”
Ripple’s Escrow: Then and Now
Morgan began his commentary by posting a side-by-side comparison of Ripple’s XRP escrow holdings over time. In late 2017, Ripple placed 55 billion XRP into escrow to assure the market of a structured and predictable release. As of mid-2025, that number has dropped to 35 billion, demonstrating Ripple’s adherence to its monthly release policy.
The post drew criticism from X user Qubic 1, who mocked XRP holders for believing in the escrow’s integrity, saying, “Have fun being dumped on.” In response, Morgan clarified that even the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission did not share that view.
Even the SEC recognised that the escrow was intended to buttress the price of XRP not deflate it. The SEC considered this to be one of the factors that would give investors an expectation of profits from the efforts of ripple. It is one of the scores of grounds I have posted to… https://t.co/JcT6xCpFiY
— bill morgan (@Belisarius2020) July 22, 2025
SEC’s Recognition of Escrow’s Price-Stabilizing Intent
According to Morgan, the SEC explicitly acknowledged during its multi-year litigation against Ripple that the purpose of the XRP escrow was to buttress the price of the token, not depress it.
“Even the SEC recognised that the escrow was intended to buttress the price of XRP, not deflate it,” Morgan wrote.
He further noted that the SEC cited this as one of the factors contributing to investor expectations of profit from Ripple’s efforts, a key argument in its broader case alleging that Ripple sold XRP as an unregistered security.
This is an important distinction, Morgan argued, because the SEC’s recognition of the escrow’s stabilizing intent contradicts the theory that Ripple is using the mechanism to harm investors.
Transparent Distribution, Not Market Dumping
Ripple introduced the XRP escrow system in 2017 with a smart contract that locked up 55 billion XRP, releasing 1 billion XRP monthly over 55 months. Unused tokens are returned to the escrow, effectively creating a rolling lockup.
We are on twitter, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) July 15, 2023
Morgan has consistently argued that Ripple’s use of the escrow has been transparent and predictable. The company routinely discloses its XRP holdings and sales in quarterly reports, with most sales directed toward institutional clients using Ripple’s On-Demand Liquidity (ODL) platform, not through open-market retail channels.
Despite this transparency, the “dump” narrative persists among certain segments of the crypto community. For Morgan, the irony is that critics are accusing Ripple of behavior even the SEC didn’t attribute to it.
“An Uber Thread?” Maybe, Maybe Not
Morgan closed his response with a tongue-in-cheek comment, suggesting he might compile all his arguments against the escrow dump theory into one comprehensive post.
“Maybe I should collate all the grounds into one Uber, but can I be bothered?” he mused.
Whether or not that thread materializes, Morgan’s stance is clear: the escrow dump theory has no basis, legal reasoning, or regulatory interpretation. Backed by years of legal scrutiny and regulatory documentation, the XRP escrow mechanism remains one of the most transparent token distribution systems in the industry, and a far cry from the speculative claims still circulating online.
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 urged to do in-depth 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 Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News
