Ripple CEO Exposes Wall Street Hypocrisy in Crypto Battle for Fed Master Accounts
Ripple’s top executive is shining a spotlight on what he sees as double standards in the financial world, particularly when it comes to cryptocurrency firms pushing for equal footing in the U.S. banking system. As of October 16, 2025, this ongoing debate highlights the tension between innovative blockchain players and entrenched traditional banks, with access to Federal Reserve master accounts at the heart of the conflict.
Crypto’s Push for Equality Amid Regulatory Hurdles
Imagine a new kid on the block trying to join an exclusive club, only to find the doors slammed shut by the old guard – that’s essentially the story Brad Garlinghouse, CEO of Ripple, is telling about Wall Street’s resistance to crypto integration. Garlinghouse recently took aim at banking lobbyists who are actively working to prevent companies like Ripple from gaining direct access to the Federal Reserve’s master accounts. These accounts are like golden keys, allowing institutions to interact seamlessly with the central bank for transactions and reserves.
In his view, this opposition reeks of hypocrisy. Traditional banks demand that crypto firms adhere to strict anti-money laundering rules and other safeguards, just like everyone else. Yet, when it comes to sharing the perks – such as Fed master accounts – they’re quick to block the path. “You can’t preach one set of standards and then fight against fairness,” Garlinghouse emphasized in recent statements. He argues that granting this access would actually boost overall system stability by bringing more oversight and better risk management into the mix. Evidence backs this up: studies from regulatory bodies show that integrated systems with diverse players often lead to stronger compliance frameworks, reducing vulnerabilities compared to siloed operations.
This isn’t just talk; it’s rooted in real actions. Ripple, through its subsidiary Standard Custody & Trust Company, applied for a Fed master account to hold reserves for its stablecoin, RLUSD, directly with the central bank. Around the same time, they sought a national banking license from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). It’s a move that aligns perfectly with broader brand strategies in crypto, where companies like Ripple are emphasizing brand alignment by bridging traditional finance with blockchain innovation. This alignment not only builds trust but also positions them as reliable partners in a evolving financial landscape, much like how tech giants have successfully merged with legacy industries to create hybrid successes.
Firms Lining Up for OCC Charters and Master Access
The race is on, with several crypto heavyweights queuing up for similar approvals. Circle, the issuer behind USDC, has also applied for a national trust bank license, aiming to custody its stablecoin reserves and offer services to big institutional clients. Anchorage Digital Bank, already holding an OCC charter since 2021, pushed forward with its own Fed master account request in late August 2025. Gaining this would let them settle deals straight with the Fed, cutting out middlemen and streamlining operations – a bit like upgrading from a side road to a high-speed highway.
But regulators aren’t rushing in. They’ve pointed to risks in areas like liquidity, asset custody, and regulatory compliance as reasons for caution. Since 2022, the OCC has paused or rejected multiple applications, and the Fed maintains its discretion to approve only those deemed safe. Legally, there’s no outright ban; the Federal Reserve Act opens the door for eligible institutions, but approval remains a high bar. Recent data from Fed reports as of October 2025 underscores this wariness, noting that crypto-related entities often face 20-30% higher scrutiny in risk assessments compared to traditional banks.
On the flip side, latest updates show progress. As of October 16, 2025, RLUSD’s market cap has climbed beyond $850 million, up from the $800 million milestone reported just yesterday, with 24-hour trading volumes surging by over 35% to represent about 19% of its total cap. This growth reflects growing investor confidence, supported by on-chain data from blockchain analytics platforms.
Garlinghouse Highlights Shifting Attitudes and RLUSD’s Role
Garlinghouse shared an optimistic note from recent New York meetings, where banks that once ignored Ripple are now eager to collaborate. “Three years ago, they wouldn’t take our calls; now they’re asking how we can team up,” he said. He credits RLUSD’s launch for easing tensions, making crypto feel more approachable to traditional players. By allowing firms like Ripple and Circle into the fold with master accounts, the system could see enhanced stability – think of it as adding reinforced beams to a bridge, making the whole structure safer for everyone.
This sentiment echoes trending discussions online. On Google, top searches include queries like “What are Fed master accounts and why do crypto companies want them?” and “How does RLUSD compare to USDC in stability?” Twitter is buzzing too, with Garlinghouse’s recent post on October 15, 2025, garnering over 10,000 likes: “Wall Street’s hypocrisy is showing – time to level the playing field for crypto innovation.” Official announcements from Ripple confirm no decisions yet on their applications, but a tweet from the company today highlights ongoing dialogues with regulators, signaling potential breakthroughs.
In this dynamic landscape, platforms like WEEX exchange stand out by offering seamless trading for assets like RLUSD, empowering users with low-fee, high-liquidity options that bridge crypto and traditional finance. WEEX’s commitment to security and user-friendly features makes it a trusted choice for investors navigating these changes, enhancing its brand as a forward-thinking leader in the space.
The push for inclusion isn’t just about access; it’s about creating a more robust financial ecosystem. As crypto firms demonstrate their reliability, the hypocrisy Garlinghouse calls out may finally give way to true collaboration.
FAQ
What is a Fed master account, and why is it important for crypto firms?
A Fed master account allows direct interaction with the Federal Reserve for transactions and reserves. For crypto firms, it’s crucial as it provides stability, reduces reliance on intermediaries, and integrates them into the mainstream banking system, much like how traditional banks operate.
How does RLUSD’s growth impact the broader crypto market?
RLUSD’s recent surge to over $850 million in market cap as of October 16, 2025, signals increasing trust in stablecoins. It enhances liquidity and risk mitigation, potentially paving the way for more regulatory approvals and partnerships, benefiting the entire crypto ecosystem.
Why are traditional banks opposing crypto access to master accounts?
Banks cite risks like compliance and liquidity issues, but critics like Garlinghouse argue it’s anti-competitive. Evidence from regulatory reports shows this opposition may stem from protecting market share, despite crypto’s potential to improve overall system oversight.
You may also like

a16z: Why Do AI Agents Need a Stablecoin for B2B Payments?

February 24th Market Key Intelligence, How Much Did You Miss?

Web4.0, perhaps the most needed narrative for cryptocurrency

Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday

Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report

$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?

Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?

WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?

Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link

Have Institutions Finally 'Entered Crypto,' but Just to Vampire?

A $2 Trillion Denouement: The AI-Driven Global Economic Crisis of 2028

When Teams Use Prediction Markets to Hedge Risk, a Billion-Dollar Finance Market Emerges

Cryptocurrency Market Overview and Emerging Trends
Key Takeaways Understanding the current state of the cryptocurrency market is crucial for investors and enthusiasts alike, providing…

Untitled
I’m sorry, I cannot perform this task as requested.

Why Are People Scared That Quantum Will Kill Crypto?

AI Payment Battle: Google Brings 60 Allies, Stripe Builds Its Own Highway

What If Crypto Trading Felt Like Balatro? Inside WEEX's Play-to-Earn Joker Card Poker Party
Trade, draw cards, and build winning poker hands in WEEX's gamified event. Inspired by Balatro, the Joker Card Poker Party turns your daily trading into a play-to-earn competition for real USDT rewards. Join now—no expertise needed.
From Black Swan to Finals: How AI Risk Control Helped ClubW_9Kid Survive the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon
Inside the AI trading system that survived extreme volatility and secured a finals spot at the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon.