David Schwartz Drops a Major Fact about Ripple and XRP

Questions surrounding Ripple’s control over XRP have remained a central issue within the crypto industry for years. The topic resurfaced after the former Ripple Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, reiterated that XRP was deliberately designed to prevent Ripple from controlling the network, even in the face of legal or regulatory pressure.

Crypto commentator Steph Is Crypto recently highlighted Schwartz’s remarks, describing them as significant. The pundit quoted Schwartz as saying that XRP had been “carefully and intentionally” designed so that Ripple itself could not control the asset.

According to the quote shared by Steph Is Crypto, Schwartz stated that the developers behind XRP made a conscious decision to ensure that the network would operate independently. He emphasized that Ripple was intentionally deprived of any ability to control XRP, underscoring a long-standing position that the asset functions separately from the company.

🚨CRAZY:

David Schwartz says $XRP was intentionally built so Ripple cannot control it, even under U.S. court pressure.

“We carefully and intentionally designed XRP so that we could NOT control it.”

— STEPH IS CRYPTO (@Steph_iscrypto) June 8, 2026

Community Members Raise Questions About Ripple’s Holdings

The post also prompted responses from other users on X who revisited the debate over Ripple’s XRP holdings and their implications.

X user Pascal argued that Schwartz’s statement does not eliminate concerns about Ripple’s influence. He pointed out that Ripple still holds approximately 40 billion XRP in escrow and company-controlled wallets, which he described as a substantial amount of the total supply. According to Pascal, such holdings represent considerable influence regardless of the network’s design.

Pascal maintained that ownership concentration remains a source of centralization and suggested that the size of Ripple’s reserves should continue to be considered when evaluating the asset.

Users Respond to Centralization Concerns

Another X user, Jeneria Lewis, offered a different perspective in response to Pascal’s comments. Lewis argued that ownership of XRP does not grant additional authority over the network in the way governance systems might. He added that the large amount of XRP held by Ripple remains locked in escrow, which he said limits the use of those holdings to manipulate the market.

Pascal disagreed with that assessment and replied that the escrow mechanism does not make market manipulation impossible. He reiterated that Ripple’s control over a significant portion of the supply, including assets in escrow and company wallets, represents a level of centralization that differs from Bitcoin.

The exchange highlighted the continuing divide among market participants regarding XRP’s structure. While supporters point to the network’s design and the absence of direct control by Ripple, critics continue to argue that the company’s sizable holdings give it considerable influence over the ecosystem.