Ripple, BNY and the XRP Ledger: Stablecoin Accounting Implications of Tokenized Trade Finance
BNY and Ripple announced on 27 October 2026 that they are expanding their institutional relationship to cover XRP and the dollar-backed RLUSD stablecoin, while simultaneously testing blockchain-based invoice financing with working capital provider C2FO. The proposal is still in development, but the structural implications for stablecoin accounting, receivables derecognition, and digital asset controls are immediate and concrete. Accounting teams and CFOs who wait for a product launch before thinking through the framework risk scrambling at exactly the wrong moment.
What Was Actually Announced
BNY already acts as primary reserve custodian for RLUSD and has an existing custody relationship with Ripple Prime. The new arrangement extends that footprint in two directions.
Custody and Minting Access
First, BNY is adding XRP and RLUSD to its institutional custody platform, and the companies intend to let BNY clients mint and redeem RLUSD directly through the bank. That is a material operational change: it puts stablecoin issuance inside a regulated banking custody layer rather than through a separate issuer interface. For institutional clients, it means a familiar counterparty and an existing account relationship handle what was previously an external workflow.
Tokenized Invoice Financing with C2FO
Second, BNY and Ripple are working with C2FO to test supply chain receivables financing on the XRP Ledger. The stated mechanics are straightforward: a supplier presents an approved invoice, capital providers fund the payment on-chain, and the supplier receives proceeds in seconds rather than waiting the several days a conventional bank transfer requires. Existing invoice terms and due dates remain unchanged for the buyer. The XRP Ledger has processed over 4.6 billion transactions since launch and settles in three to five seconds, according to Ripple.
Both the custody expansion and the C2FO initiative remain subject to further development. The companies have not disclosed a timeline for when services will be available.
RLUSD in Context
RLUSD launched in December 2024 and has grown to a circulating supply where more than one billion dollars of it has been issued on the XRP Ledger. Ripple also announced a separate partnership with Robinhood covering stablecoins, treasury operations, and institutional markets. RLUSD is already available on Robinhood Chain and Bitstamp by Robinhood, with availability in the Robinhood app expected later in 2026. Robinhood will use the stablecoin for institutional settlement on the XRP Ledger and integrate Ripple Treasury for cash management, payments, and liquidity operations.
Monica Long, Ripple's president, framed the direction clearly: the industry is moving past initial on-chain asset issuance toward making tokenized assets usable for payments and collateral across financial markets. The BNY partnership and the C2FO pilot are two concrete expressions of that shift.
For a parallel view of how stablecoin accounting considerations are emerging across different product structures, see our earlier analysis of stablecoin accounting considerations for SoFi tokenized deposits.
Stablecoin Accounting: The Classification Question
How a firm books RLUSD depends on the accounting framework it applies and the purpose for which it holds the token. Neither IFRS nor US GAAP has issued a stablecoin-specific standard, so practitioners must work from first principles using existing guidance.
Under IFRS
IFRS 9 covers financial instruments. A dollar-pegged stablecoin redeemable at par on demand has characteristics that could support classification as a financial asset, specifically a cash equivalent under IAS 7 if the holding is short-term, highly liquid, and subject to insignificant risk of change in value. The challenge is that RLUSD is not a claim on a bank deposit in the conventional sense; it is a token whose value is backed by reserves held by the issuer. The reserve composition, redemption terms, and any smart-contract constraints matter for the analysis. Firms holding RLUSD for treasury liquidity purposes will need to document why it meets, or does not meet, the IAS 7 cash-equivalent criteria before classifying it on the face of the statement of financial position.
Under US GAAP
The FASB's ASU 2023-08, effective for most public entities from fiscal years beginning after 15 December 2024, requires that certain crypto assets be measured at fair value each reporting period with changes recognized in net income. RLUSD, pegged to the dollar, would be expected to show minimal fair value movements, but the standard still applies. Firms need to confirm RLUSD meets the ASU's definition of an in-scope crypto asset and set up the fair value measurement process accordingly. The practical burden is the ongoing disclosure requirement, not the measurement volatility.
Receivables Derecognition and Trade Finance Mechanics
The C2FO pilot introduces a second, distinct accounting question that sits inside the existing receivables and trade finance literature rather than the crypto-asset standards.
When Does the Receivable Leave the Seller's Balance Sheet?
Under IFRS 9, a financial asset is derecognized when the entity transfers substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership, or when control is transferred under a continuing involvement model. In a traditional invoice discounting arrangement, whether the receivable derecognizes depends on whether the arrangement is with recourse or without recourse. The on-chain structure described by Ripple and C2FO does not alter that fundamental analysis; it simply changes the settlement medium from a bank wire to a RLUSD payment on the XRP Ledger.
What changes is the timing and auditability of the transfer event. Settlement in seconds, confirmed on a public ledger, creates a precise, immutable timestamp for when funds moved. That is actually helpful for auditors and for period-end cutoff testing. The accounting team still needs to determine whether the arrangement qualifies as a true sale, but the evidence trail is cleaner than a batch-processed bank transfer.
US GAAP Treatment Under ASC 860
ASC 860 governs transfers of financial assets under US GAAP. A transfer qualifies for derecognition as a sale when the transferor surrenders control, the transferred assets are isolated from the transferor in bankruptcy, and the transferee has the right to pledge or exchange them. The blockchain settlement layer does not change the legal isolation analysis; that remains a function of the underlying contract and jurisdictional law. CFOs structuring participation in the C2FO pilot should ensure legal counsel signs off on the isolation and control criteria before treating invoice proceeds as off-balance-sheet.
Tax Implications for US Entities
From a US federal tax perspective, receiving RLUSD in settlement of a trade receivable is functionally equivalent to receiving any other dollar-denominated payment, provided the stablecoin consistently maintains its one-dollar peg. The IRS has not issued RLUSD-specific guidance, but existing Notice 2014-21 and subsequent guidance treat virtual currency as property. A stablecoin received at par and redeemed at par would typically generate no gain or loss on the exchange itself, though the facts and circumstances of each transaction determine the outcome.
Where the tax analysis becomes more complex is if the stablecoin is held between receipt and redemption and the value fluctuates, however slightly, from the dollar peg. Firms participating in the C2FO pilot should establish a clear policy on the holding period, document the fair market value at receipt and at disposition, and maintain records sufficient to support any gain or loss calculation at year-end. The immutable XRP Ledger transaction record is an asset here: it provides timestamp and amount data that can feed directly into a firm's crypto compliance reporting process.
For the broader regulatory risk context surrounding digital asset market structure in the US, see our coverage of how JPMorgan frames regulatory risk in digital asset markets.
What Accounting Firms and CFOs Should Do Now
The BNY-Ripple arrangement is proposed, not live. That is precisely the right moment to act: build the framework before the first transaction hits the ledger.
Three Immediate Steps
First, classify the instrument. Pull the RLUSD whitepaper and reserve attestation reports. Determine whether RLUSD qualifies as a cash equivalent under IAS 7 or falls into a financial assets category, and document the rationale. For US GAAP preparers, confirm the ASU 2023-08 scoping analysis and set up fair value measurement workflows.
Second, map the derecognition triggers. If your client or business intends to sell receivables for RLUSD settlement, run the IFRS 9 or ASC 860 control and risk-and-reward analysis now, with legal input on the specific contract terms C2FO uses. Do not wait until the first transaction to discover the arrangement is on-balance-sheet when you expected it to be off.
Third, audit your digital asset accounting software and crypto bookkeeping software stack. On-chain settlement creates a high-volume, timestamped record. Your existing systems need to ingest XRP Ledger transaction data, apply the correct cost basis, and produce the disclosures required by your applicable framework. If the current stack cannot handle stablecoin receipts and redemptions at the transaction level, that is a gap to close before the product goes live.
The speed of on-chain settlement is a genuine operational advantage, but it also means the accounting record accumulates fast. Firms that build the classification, derecognition, and reporting framework in advance will be positioned to capture that advantage rather than scramble to reconstruct it at year-end.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is RLUSD treated as cash or a crypto asset on the balance sheet?
That depends on your accounting framework and the specific holding purpose. Under IFRS, a short-term RLUSD position redeemable at par on demand may qualify as a cash equivalent under IAS 7, but only if the redemption terms and reserve composition support the analysis. Under US GAAP, RLUSD likely falls within the scope of ASU 2023-08 and requires fair value measurement each period. Document the classification rationale with reference to the issuer's reserve attestations and the redemption contract terms.
Does receiving RLUSD for an invoice create a taxable event under US federal tax law?
The IRS treats virtual currency as property. Receiving RLUSD at par for a trade receivable should not generate gain or loss if the stablecoin's fair market value equals the invoice amount at the time of receipt, but this is a facts-and-circumstances analysis. Any deviation from the dollar peg between receipt and redemption could create a small realized gain or loss. Firms should record the fair market value of RLUSD at the moment of each receipt and each disposition and retain XRP Ledger transaction records to support the calculation.
When can a supplier derecognize the receivable under IFRS 9?
Derecognition occurs when substantially all the risks and rewards of the receivable are transferred, or when control passes under a continuing involvement assessment. Receiving RLUSD on-chain in exchange for an approved invoice could satisfy the derecognition criteria if the arrangement is without recourse and the legal isolation conditions are met. The on-ledger settlement timestamp provides clear evidence of the transfer moment, but the underlying contract and jurisdictional law govern whether a true sale has occurred.
How does the BNY custody arrangement affect controls over RLUSD?
Having BNY hold RLUSD in institutional custody means the operational risk profile differs from a self-custodied stablecoin position. Minting and redemption through a regulated bank custodian introduces familiar counterparty relationships and existing AML/KYC frameworks. For internal control purposes, firms should ensure that the BNY custody arrangement is reflected in their digital asset custody policy, that dual-approval controls apply to minting and redemption instructions, and that reconciliation between the bank's custody statement and the XRP Ledger record is performed at least monthly.
Are there disclosure requirements specific to tokenized trade finance under IFRS 7?
IFRS 7 requires disclosure of the nature and extent of risks arising from financial instruments, including liquidity risk, credit risk, and market risk. A tokenized receivable financing arrangement introduces technology-specific risks, such as smart-contract execution risk and ledger availability, that supplement rather than replace conventional credit and liquidity risk disclosures. Preparers should assess whether these additional risk factors are material and, if so, include qualitative disclosure in the notes to the financial statements explaining the nature of the on-chain arrangement and the controls in place.
Source: The Block