author
Ahmed Barakat
author
Share
Fact verified by
CryptoNews editorial team
author
Australian lawyer and prominent commentator in the XRP community, Bill Morgan, made headlines as he called on Ripple to reinstate an amount less than its monthly XRP collateral issuance of 1 billion XRP. According to Morgan, accelerating the path to full circulating supply would establish XRP as a reliable hard money asset and eliminate the excess supply that continues to impact sentiment.
The argument isn’t new in broad strokes, but the details of Morgan’s framing push it into clearer territory, and Ripple’s CTO Emeritus has already drawn a clear line about how far the company is willing to go.
With 32.74 billion XRP still held in escrow and the current issuance pace extending the full trading timeline to nearly nine years, the structural mathematics gives Morgan’s argument weight. The question the XRP community is now openly discussing is not whether the accumulation is real, but whether Ripple has the incentive and flexibility to compress this timeline.
Discover: The best cryptocurrencies to diversify your investment portfolio
Accumulated supply ripple
Ripple created its own escrow system in 2017, placing 55 billion XRP in 55 separate contracts on a ledger, each of which releases 1 billion XRP on the first of every month. This mechanism is designed to create predictable and auditable supplies and avoid unannounced emptying of the central treasury.
However, what it also created, by design, was an indefinitely extendable timeline: Ripple takes what it needs for operations and institutional distribution, and then puts the rest back into new contracts, effectively extending the timeline month after month.
Morgan’s position, stated publicly on X, is straightforward:
The logic is three layers. First, fewer reclosures shorten the nine-year horizon. Second, full trading removes the psychological shadow projection that discourages evaluation. Third, a fully traded, fixed supply of cryptocurrencies is structurally more credible for institutional participants who price assets according to known fundamentals rather than unknown future release schedules.
It is worth noting that Morgan is looking for an argument. He has previously defended the guarantee mechanism itself against allegations that it is a deliberate tool for price suppression. He also noted that the price of XRP ranged from approximately $0.50 to over $3.00 between November 2024 and January 2025 while monthly releases continued without interruption. His current call is to complete the process, which he considers legitimate, more quickly.
Discover: The best advance token sales
David Schwartz draws the line
David Schwartz, Ripple’s CTO Emeritus, is not in favor of the acceleration, and has flatly rejected the most extreme version of the proposal circulating in the XRP community: burning the entire collateralized supply.
Schwartz cited the Stellar code burn as his primary cautionary reference. He argues that the destruction of supply led to a short-lived market reaction rather than a permanent revaluation of valuation. His broader defense of the current model is that Ripple voluntarily restocks any XRP it doesn’t need immediately.
Regarding the timeline question specifically, Schwartz acknowledged the inherent uncertainty:
“It is difficult to predict because you have to make assumptions about how much XRP Ripple will be used and how much will be returned in subsequent escrow months.”
Schwartz’s position is structurally consistent with how Ripple has managed escrow since its inception. The company has positioned measured and predictable distribution as a benefit, not a limitation. Changing this calculus would require Ripple to decide that the reputational and institutional benefits of acceleration outweigh the risks of increased selling pressure in the near term. Essentially, it’s a trade-off that the company has not yet indicated it is willing to make.
The last ripple MiCA regulatory approvals in Europe Reinforcing the pattern: The company is building a compatible infrastructure, and supply stability is part of this corporate playing field.
Don’t miss your chance to get a $1000 Airdrop on ByBit
What the community discussion actually reveals about XRP is beyond the headlines
Beyond the headlines, the division within the XRP community clearly delineates two different theories of what XRP is supposed to be. The pro-acceleration camp, allied with Morgan, treats the hard money narrative as its core long-term value proposition. A completely fixed and circulating supply that can be evaluated based on demand fundamentals alone. The camp in favor of the current pace treats Ripple’s controlled distribution as an asset to institutional credibility, not a liability.
There is a third concern that runs under both camps: if ripple By issuing more net XRP per month without a corresponding increase in demand, additional supply hits the market as selling pressure. Current price action of XRP This does not clearly indicate that the market is constrained by its demand-side capacity in a way that would cleanly absorb larger net monthly issuances.
Meanwhile, the token burning option has been effectively closed. Schwartz’s Stellar reference reflects a long-held internal view that destroying collateral reserves would create hype and would permanently eliminate the optionality that Ripple currently has.
Discover: The best cryptocurrencies to diversify your investment portfolio
