2025 Cardano NCL
272 DReps voted · 65 with a rationale · 26 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes14.3M ₳No rationale
- NoChanged14.2M ₳Rationale
時間だけが足早に過ぎていきます。2025年は慎重に。
Earlier votes
Yes1y agoSuperseded
時間だけが足早に過ぎていきます。2025年は慎重に。
- No14.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes13.3M ₳Rationale
After reviewing the proposal and associated commentary, I am voting YES on the governance action to establish a 200M ADA Net Change Limit (NCL) for the remainder of 2025.
This proposal reflects a meaningful improvement over previous attempts. It avoids retroactive application, proposes a conservative cap below projected inflows, and adheres to the constitutional framework. It enables Cardano’s first budgeting process while maintaining a cautious approach to treasury access.
In my previous rationale, I emphasized the need for clarity, prudence, and phased implementation. While definitional gaps around “Net Change Limit” remain, I believe the risk of inaction now outweighs the risk of approving a well-scoped, time-bounded cap.This NCL allows the community to begin operationalizing governance and observing real-world impacts without overexposing the treasury. With future adjustments possible, and continued emphasis on transparency and accountability, RCADA supports this proposal.
- Yes12.1M ₳No rationale
- No12.1M ₳Rationale
As Wada DRep, we represent a decentralized and globally connected network of Cardano community builders, innovators, and voters; many based across Africa and the diaspora. Our role in constitutional governance is to act in the best interests of the ecosystem while reflecting the priorities of our community and honoring our internal deliberative frameworks.
We have voted NO on the 200 million ADA Net Change Limit (NCL) proposal currently under consideration. Our rationale is grounded in the fiscal framework we adopted during the budget evaluation cycle, the governance signals already sent by the broader Cardano community, and the practical needs of delivering on our shared roadmap.
As part of our internal governance process, the Wada DRep committee adopted a 280 million ADA Net Change Limit as the basis for evaluating and voting on funding proposals submitted in the 2025 budget round. This figure was selected to strike a responsible balance, well below the community’s maximum cap of 350M ADA, yet sufficient to support high-impact projects advancing the ecosystem.
The vast majority of the proposals we supported under this internal framework are now bundled within the Intersect-administered ₳275.3M aggregate budget. Voting "yes" on a new 200M NCL would directly undermine the logic and consistency of our internal budgeting decisions, calling into question the integrity of the structured assessment we undertook with our community.Through a robust, DRep-led signaling process, the Cardano community has already approved more than 275 million ADA in funding proposals, all of which passed the required threshold of 50%+1 Lovelace in live DRep stake. These proposals span core development, governance infrastructure, marketing, community empowerment, open-source tooling, and more.
Reducing the NCL to 200M ADA now would effectively block full or timely disbursement of many of these already-approved initiatives. We believe it is a governance failure to approve a project and then retroactively impose fiscal constraints that prevent its execution.This is the first full year of decentralized, constitutional governance in Cardano. A Net Change Limit is intended to serve as a safeguard and not as a restrictive ceiling that stifles the very processes it was meant to enable. Approving only 200M ADA for 2025 would risk starving essential components of Cardano’s governance experiment: constitutional oversight, DRep operations, auditing frameworks, and the infrastructure required to make Voltaire viable.
We believe a stronger test of governance maturity is not whether we spend less but whether we spend wisely and deliver results. Artificially suppressing funding capacity may delay the development of tools and insights we need to evolve the governance model.We acknowledge and appreciate the fiscal caution motivating the 200M proposal. However, we believe that caution is better reflected in the ongoing proposal to establish a 300M ADA NCL for Epochs 563–635, which extends into 2026. That figure is more aligned with expected treasury inflows and allows for continuity of funding without encouraging excess.
In contrast, the 200M proposal feels disconnected from both the scale of approved budgets and the trajectory of Cardano’s growth. Rather than help us build a robust treasury governance culture, it may erode confidence in the predictability and reliability of the on-chain funding process.Our vote of "No" on the 200M ADA NCL proposal is not a vote against caution; it is a vote for coherence, credibility, and continuity. It reflects our obligation as a DRep to act in alignment with the budgeting framework we adopted, to defend the legitimacy of Cardano governance, and to preserve trust in the roadmap we are collectively building.
Cardano’s governance needs to be accountable, but also functional. That means setting limits that are anchored in realistic funding needs and in the will of the community and not overly restrictive thresholds that ignore context and hamstring delivery.
For all these reasons, we, the Wada DRep, have voted NO.
Let us govern boldly and wisely. - Yes11.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.9M ₳No rationale
- NoRevoted10.8M ₳History
Earlier votes
No1y agoSuperseded
- YesRevoted10.8M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes1y agoSuperseded
Yes1y agoSuperseded
- No8.8M ₳Rationale
このガバナンスアクション自体の意図には一定の理解を示すべきだとは思いますが、すでに次の期間（2025/3/26～2025/4/25）で提出された「2025 Net Change Limit」ガバナンスアクションが、DRep（76.18%）とICC（66.67%）によって可決されており、私も賛成票を投じています。純変動上限が確定しない限り次のステップには進めず、制度の停滞は避けるべきだと考えています。このタイミングで改めて別のNCLが提出される理由については理解できなくはありませんが、すでに可決された上限を尊重し、いまは次に進むべきだと考えています。以上を踏まえ、私はこの「2025 Cardano NCL」には反対票を投じます。\n\nWhile I recognize the intent behind this governance action, the "2025 Net Change Limit" governance action submitted during the period of March 26, 2025 to April 25, 2025 has already been approved by DReps (76.18%) and ICC (66.67%), and I also voted in favor of it. Without a confirmed Net Change Limit, we cannot proceed to the next steps, and I believe it is important to avoid governance stagnation. Although I can understand why a different NCL proposal is being submitted at this timing, I believe we should respect the already approved limit and move forward. Given these circumstances, I will vote against this "2025 Cardano NCL."
- Yes8.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes7.6M ₳Rationale
We are in 2025. I've been in Cardano since 2017. The general expectation that transaction fees would start contributing meaningfully to increasing the treasury has not yet materialized. This is today's reality. It is April 25, 2025.
Our collective optimism about rapid widespread blockchain adoption - especially Cardano - was probably misguided. A lower limit in 2025 than the previously approved 350M ADA limit, essentially forces governance participants to focus on priorities that will give more bang for the buck. For ADA holders.
There are needs and there are wants. 200M ADA will cover the needs and not just basic ones. Reminds me of the debate of what is the purpose of art. What is the purpose of all this?
Reminder: ‘L’art pour l’art’ was a phrase and a philosophy that pushed back against the idea that art must serve moral, political, or educational functions. As ‘l’art pour l’art’ was challenged for ignoring purpose, so too we must challenge development for development’s sake. Treasury funds must serve real Cardano needs—not just the desire to build and develop through treasury subsidies.
"Développement pour développement”—development for its own sake funded by the treasury —is not a sustainable principle for Cardano’s treasury strategy. We will be best served by funding needs and clear common sense strategy, not enabling endless creation and dependence without clear purpose or prioritization. Some teams may drop off, some products may not survive.
Every expenditure is risking funds. I still see lots or risks and few certain bets.
I've read 100 or so Cardano 2025 budget proposals so far, or roughly half. An NCL of 200M ADA seems a better choice than the previously approved 350M ADA - from what I have read so far. I also share the concerns voiced earlier by Cardano Whale about releasing too much ADA into the market - especially as 200M ADA seems to be sufficient for 2025. The NCL can easily be raised in case of outstanding circumstances.
My only potential gains from the Cardano 2025 budget process are:
a. DRep compensation (I will vote against)
b. milestone/community reviewer payments from Project Catalyst (I will abstain from voting on Project Catalyst - (this is just a personal decision - not advocating it to others!) to attempt to maintain a higher level of personal objectivity in the entire process) - Yes7.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes6.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.9M ₳Rationale
This is an NCL aligned more to what strong community feedback has been. There is some concern over maybe potential whipsaw events due to how supersedence works but ultimately, I think this is likely the best possible way to start out with the budget for the remainder of 2025.
The rationale with this NCL highlights some critical changes still occurring within governance, understanding community sentiment, and things not yet determined in terms of budget process, etc. With those things in mind it attempts to appropriately set a limiting NCL until those things are hashed out. I am fully in support of this approach.
- Yes5.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.8M ₳No rationale
- No4.8M ₳Rationale
🚨Decision Update - Coin Ceylon DRep has voted NO on the Cardano governance action “NCL – 200M” - We believe this decision deserves full context. To understand our position and the rationale behind our vote, read more at -🌐 - https://www.coinceylon.com/drep/#our-rationales
- Yes4.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- No4.6M ₳No rationale
- No4.4M ₳No rationale
- Abstain4.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.1M ₳No rationale
- No4.1M ₳Rationale
Optamos por votar "NÃO" nesta ação de governança, pois o limite de gasto anual do tesouro proposto é insuficiente para o financiamento do desenvolvimento pela IOG e pelos projetos comunitários aprovados anteriormente.
[English] We have chosen to vote "NO" on this governance action, as the proposed annual treasury spending cap is insufficient to fund development by IOG and previously approved community projects. - Yes4M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.8M ₳Rationale
Rationale for Supporting the 200M ADA NCL for 2025 as a Cardano DRep
As a Cardano Delegate Representative (DRep), I support the proposed 200M ADA Network Contribution Limit (NCL) for 2025. My decision is driven by a commitment to fiscal responsibility and the need for robust governance and vendor management processes to ensure the prudent use of public funds. At this stage, I believe the Cardano ecosystem’s governance mechanisms and organizational maturity are not sufficiently developed to responsibly manage the proposed 350M ADA allocation.
A key concern is the lack of rigorous oversight and pushback in vendor management, particularly with Input Output Global (IOG). For context, Charles Hoskinson, co-founder of IOG, has stated that he personally funded Cardano’s development at an estimated $450M USD over seven years, equating to an average annual run rate of approximately $64M. While costs may have surely escalated, the proposed 350M ADA allocation—funded by public treasury resources—represents a significant increase, nearly doubling his historical spending level when Charles himself bore the financial burden. Of course, this is also taking him at his word on almost half a billion in spending. Without thorough scrutiny, this escalation raises questions about necessity and efficiency.
In April 2025, IOG’s “take it or leave it” stance on funding proposals further underscores the need for stronger governance processes. The Cardano governance function has a fiduciary duty to rigorously evaluate vendor proposals to ensure they are justified and cost-effective. Currently, the absence of a robust, independent review process limits our ability to validate the reasonableness of the proposed budget.
While I assume good faith on the part of IOG and recognize their contributions as good actors in the ecosystem, public funds demand a higher standard of accountability. Until the Cardano governance framework develops more mature processes—such as expert-led reviews and competitive vendor evaluations—we must adopt a fiscally conservative approach to safeguard community resources.
A lower NCL of 200M ADA provides a prudent framework for 2025. It encourages negotiation with vendors, fosters competitive bidding, and incentivizes cost-effective solutions without compromising essential development. Importantly, the Cardano community retains the flexibility to vote for an NCL increase later if additional funding is demonstrably necessary and governance processes have matured to manage it.
Conversely, an overly generous NCL risks wasteful spending due to inadequate oversight, regulatory capture, or insufficient vendor scrutiny. Once public funds are misallocated, they cannot be recovered, potentially undermining trust in Cardano’s governance and hindering long-term ecosystem growth.
In conclusion, the 200M ADA NCL strikes a responsible balance, aligning spending with the current maturity of Cardano’s governance and vendor management processes. This conservative approach mitigates risks while preserving the ability to adapt as our ecosystem evolves. I urge my fellow DReps and the Cardano community to support this limit to ensure fiscal discipline and uphold our collective responsibility to steward public funds wisely.
- Yes3.8M ₳Rationale
I am voting Yes because we should be cautious for this first governance experiment. Setting a 200M ADA NCL allows us to start tight, protect the Treasury, and fund essential growth responsibly. This approach gives the community time to mature its budgeting and auditing processes.
- Yes3.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.4M ₳No rationale
- No3.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.1M ₳Rationale
I am voting yes for this NCL proposal, as it falls within my personal NCL of 200-250 Million ADA.
I think this proposed NCL is fiscally responsible based on the budget proposals we have seen from all submitting members.
I believe it is extremely important to be prudent with our spending in this first year of ADA governance, and I have not been convinced that a spend limit of more than 250 Million ADA is justified in any way.
If a NCL proposal of 250 Million ADA is at some point proposed, I will vote yes for that as well, but this proposal satisfies my desires for fiscal responsibility.
Thank you to the proposers who worked together to make this happen and were able to get a NCL that has community support submitted past the unnecessarily high submission threshold of a 100,000 ADA deposit.
- Yes3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- No2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳Rationale
We need to pass the budget for this year.
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳No rationale
- No2.6M ₳Rationale
私はDRepとして、Net Change Limit（NCL）を200M ADAに制限する提案に反対（NO）票を投じました。
現在のCardanoは、Ouroboros Leios、Hydra、Midnight、Chain State、Bullet、AtlasといったCardano 2.0を構成する中核技術が同時に立ち上がる重要な転換点にあります。このような「初動期」には、個々の技術を孤立的に評価するのではなく、全体として技術的調和（technical harmony）を保ちつつ開発を進める柔軟な資金設計が不可欠です。
今回のNCL提案──すなわち「年間の財務変動上限を200M ADAに設定する」──は、そのような現実的資金需要と乖離していると判断しました。
第一に、Cardano Treasuryには既に年間約350M ADAのインフローがあり、200M ADAの上限はその6割弱に過ぎません。これは「健全な節度」ではなく、拡張期における機会損失のリスクを孕んでいます。
第二に、2025年予算ReconciliationでのDRep投票の傾向からも、実需は200M ADAを大きく超えていたことが明らかです。YES票が集まった提案群の合算規模だけでも300M ADAを超えており、PragmaやDC Spark、World Mobileといった多様な実装主体への期待が現れています。分散的エコシステムにおいては、資金需要もまた分散し、単一の低上限では成長機会を阻害します。
加えて、SolanaやzkSyncなど競合プロジェクトは、すでに数億ドル規模の成長予算を投入しており、スピードと資本力の両面で先行しています。Cardanoが競争優位を確立するには、「守り」ではなく「攻め」の投資姿勢が必要です。
以上を踏まえ、私は今回のNCL案にNO票を投じました。
この立場は、2025年Cardano予算Reconciliationにおける私の投票傾向とも整合しています。私は194件中137件（約71%）にYES票を投じました。内訳は以下の通りです：- 「Core」（基盤技術・スケーラビリティ）…41件
- 「Marketing & Innovation」（RWA、ステーブルコイン等）…52件
- 「Governance Support」（Voltaire、GovTool支援）…13件
- 「Research」（中長期開発・標準化）…12件
- 「No Category」（AIRA等 地域戦略）…5件
- 「Advance Support」（SPO支援等）…2件
私はすべての提案を以下の6つの基準に基づいて評価しました：
- Cardano 2.0に不可欠な技術的中核（Leios、Hydra、Midnight等）
- GovToolを起点とする分散型ガバナンス機構の成熟
- RWAやステーブルコインを通じた制度的実装への接続
- AIRAなど公共性ある地域戦略の支援
- 短期実装可能性と中長期的な持続性の両立
- 成果目標と測定指標（contract-based clarity）の明確さ
今回のNCL案は単なる財務枠ではなく、Cardanoの成長に対するスタンスを問う政治的選択です。私は、Cardanoが調和と競争力を備えたエコシステムとして進化するためには、柔軟かつ戦略的な予算執行能力を持つべきと考え、本提案には反対票を投じます。
As a DRep, I cast a NO vote on the proposal to cap the Net Change Limit (NCL) at 200 million ADA.
Cardano is currently at a pivotal turning point, where multiple core technologies that constitute Cardano 2.0—such as Ouroboros Leios, Hydra, Midnight, Chain State, Bullet, and Atlas—are being launched simultaneously. During such an early-stage phase, it is essential not to evaluate each technology in isolation, but rather to enable integrated development with technical harmony. This requires a funding design that is both sufficiently sized and flexible.
From this perspective, the NCL proposal—which would set the annual treasury spending cap at 200M ADA—was, in my view, misaligned with actual funding needs.
First, the Cardano Treasury already sees annual inflows of around 350M ADA. Setting a ceiling at 200M ADA means utilizing less than 60% of available funds. This is not “fiscal prudence” but rather a limitation that risks missing growth opportunities.
Second, the outcome of the 2025 Budget Reconciliation showed that actual demand far exceeds 200M ADA. The total requested amount for proposals that received majority YES votes easily surpassed 300M ADA, demonstrating strong expectations across diverse implementing entities such as Pragma, DC Spark, and World Mobile. In a decentralized ecosystem, funding demands are naturally distributed, and a single rigid cap can easily become a bottleneck for growth.
Moreover, ecosystems like Solana and zkSync have already deployed hundreds of millions of dollars in growth funding, gaining a lead in both speed and capital strength. To remain competitive, Cardano must adopt an offensive investment posture, not a defensive one.
For these reasons, I voted NO on the NCL proposal.
This position is also consistent with my voting behavior during the 2025 Cardano Budget Reconciliation. I supported 137 out of 194 proposals (approximately 71%). The breakdown is as follows:
- Core (infrastructure, scalability): 41 proposals
- Marketing & Innovation (RWA, stablecoins, integrations): 52 proposals
- Governance Support (Voltaire, GovTool): 13 proposals
- Research (long-term development and standardization): 12 proposals
- No Category (regional initiatives like AIRA): 5 proposals
- Advance Support (SPO engagement): 2 proposals
All proposals were evaluated against the following six criteria:
- Whether they advance the core technical foundations of Cardano 2.0 (e.g., Leios, Hydra, Midnight)
- Whether they strengthen decentralized governance, especially around GovTool
- Whether they connect Cardano to institutional use cases via RWA and stablecoins
- Whether they support public infrastructure and regional diversity, such as AIRA
- Whether they balance short-term feasibility with long-term sustainability
- Whether they present clear deliverables and metrics (contract-based clarity)
The NCL proposal is not merely a financial parameter—it represents a political choice about Cardano's stance toward growth. I believe that Cardano should evolve into an ecosystem that balances harmony with competitiveness. For that reason, I advocate for strategic and flexible treasury execution, and I voted NO on this proposal.
- NoRevoted2.5M ₳History
Earlier votes
No1y agoSuperseded
- Yes2.5M ₳Rationale
I have been saying from the beginning that I wanted to see an NCL in the 150-250 range. This is bc that within this range we can ensure the treasury will continue to grow. The higher we go the closer we get to our treasury getting depleted YoY.
- Yes2.4M ₳No rationale
- No2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale