A in writing proposal submitted to the new SEC cryptocurrency working group, touting Ripple's XRP as a "strategic financial asset of the United States." But contrary to what several XRP and crypto influencers suggest, this is not an official initiative from the U.S. regulator itself. Indeed, anyone can submit such proposals to the SEC.

Thus, this is a bold attempt by one individual to bring the benefits of XRP to the attention of the regulator-possibly in hopes of positively influencing the XRP price as well. The document's author, a certain Maximilian Staudinger, incidentally, seems to have little in-depth knowledge of crypto. Among other things, he suggests that the U.S. government should purchase 25 million bitcoin. This is remarkable, since the fixed maximum supply of bitcoin is only 21 million coins.

Still, avid XRP supporters may not be entirely on the wrong track. According to Charles Gasparino, financial reporter at Fox Business, the SEC would actually consider to re-evaluate the status of XRP. According to Gasparino, the regulator is currently investigating whether XRP should be viewed as a commodity (commodity) rather than a security (security) because of its active trading and actual use. Comparisons to Ethereum, which the SEC previously did not classify as a security, reinforce the idea that XRP may not be a security either.

This discussion stems from the pending lawsuit between Ripple and the SEC. Insiders increasingly expect this case to end soon, with XRP possibly receiving support from the SEC in the process.

Gasparino's statements follow earlier reporting by his colleague Eleanor Terrett. She previously indicated that the lawsuit will be concluded soon, clarifying the legal status of XRP. "To my understanding, the delay in reaching a settlement is due to negotiations by Ripple's legal team. They are pursuing more favorable terms, taking into account the ruling the district court gave last August," Terrett said.

According to Terrett, the SEC itself is now questioning its earlier contention, in which it alleged that Ripple representatives sold unregistered securities to institutional customers. "Accepting Judge Torres' ruling would mean that Ripple was in fact admitting misconduct-while the SEC currently appears uncertain whether there was any such misconduct at all," Terrett explained.

Terrett concludes her analysis with a rhetorical question, "If the new SEC leadership finally decides to spare previously prosecuted crypto companies because it recognizes that regulation creates clarity and thus solves the problem-why should Ripple be punished any longer?"