2025 Net Change Limit
7 of 7 committee members voted
- Cardano Atlantic Council07e0eb70…5bdeYesResigned · term ends epoch 580Rationale
This governance action, as proposed, is Constitutional.
This governance action proposing a Net Change Limit (NCL) for the Cardano ecosystem is Constitutional.
- Cardano Foundation6796d87d…c280YesExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale unavailable
- Cardano Japan Council (ICC)4012cab5…0755YesExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale
Net Change Limit 2025. -->> is constitutional
[Constitutional] This governance action was reviewed in accordance with the Cardano Blockchain Constitution, focusing on whether it is appropriate to vote on this type of Info Action and its constitutionality. Originally, discussions arose from the interpretation of Article VII, Section 4, which states that Info Actions generally do not require a vote unless they pertain to budgetary matters.�n�nConstitutional Analysis: 1: Voting Obligation (Article VII, Section 4)= The Constitution states that Info Actions are not subject to mandatory votes except when budget-related. This Info Action relates to Net Change Limit, which governs treasury allocation potential. 2: Community Interpretation and Voting (YES=3 votes)= This Info Action indirectly affects budget and is thus voting-eligible. ABSTAIN-2 votes: The action does not directly allocate funds and is not voting-mandatory. 3: Constitutional Validity= No member claimed this Info Action was unconstitutional. It was unanimously agreed that the proposal complies with the Constitution.
Based on the majority decision (3 YES, 2 ABSTAIN), a vote was cast in favor of this Info Action. Regardless of differing interpretations on voting obligation, no evidence or opinion suggested this proposal was unconstitutional. Therefore, we conclude this Info Action is 'Constitutional'.
- Emurgodc2b0706…89b8YesExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale
EMURGO concludes to vote in favour of this Info Action, based on the rationale provided below.
This Net Change Limit Info action stores all relevant data that affects the conclusion on IPFS. We find that this meets the necessary requirements outlined in Article III, Section 5 of the Cardano Constitution, and therefore conclude that the proposal is constitutional.
Proposal link:
https://adastat.net/governances/9b62b3c632f329016a968ac25211825bb4f84b12461121c7da3aa11df92370f900Reference: Cardano Constitution – Article III. Participatory and Decentralized Governance
Section 5
In order to promote transparency in the process of on-chain governance, prior to being recorded or enacted on-chain, all proposed governance actions are expected to follow a standardized and legible format including a URL and hash of all documented off-chain content to the Cardano Blockchain. Sufficient rationale shall be provided to justify the requested change to the Cardano Blockchain. The rationale shall include, at a minimum, a title, abstract, reason for the proposal, and relevant supporting materials.
The content of every on-chain governance action must be identical to the final off-chain version of the proposed action.
"Hard Fork Initiation" and "Protocol Parameter Change" governance actions shall undergo sufficient technical review and scrutiny as mandated by the Guardrails to ensure that the governance action does not endanger the security, functionality, performance or long-term sustainability of the Cardano Blockchain. On-chain governance actions should address their expected impact on the Cardano Blockchain ecosystem.
All owners of ada shall have the right to ensure that the process for participating in, submitting and voting on on-chain governance actions is open and transparent and is protected from undue influence and manipulation.
The governance action proposal is constitutional
- Input | Output3c9ebce6…1e4cYesExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale
Input Output finds the “2025 Net Change Limit” Info Action constitutional.
As a critical dependency of the budget as specified by the constitution, a Net Change Limit, which is an Info Action, permits members of the Constitutional Committees to express their views on such an Info Action. IO is happy to find that this Info Action meets and is consistent with the standards of the Cardano constitution.
The Cardano constitution requires a Net Change Limit to be in place prior to the approval of a Cardano Blockchain ecosystem budget (Article IV, Section 3; TREASURY-01a), making the Net Change Limit a critical dependency of later budget and treasury actions which the Constitutional Committee is required to vote on (Article VII, Section 4).
Only two significant constitutional constraints are relevant to consider.
First, Info Actions (like all governance actions) are “expected to follow a standardized and legible format including a URL and hash of all documented off-chain content to the Cardano Blockchain” (Article III, Section 5). The “2025 Net Change Limit” Info Action meets this standard.
Second, all governance actions should be evaluated in accordance with the Constitution's Tenets.
Section 4 of Article VII of the Constitution states:
Because "Info" actions have no on-chain effect and, accordingly, are neither constitutional nor unconstitutional, Constitutional Committee members may not prevent "Info" actions from being recorded on-chain. Members of the Constitutional Committee may nevertheless record a vote on-chain regarding an "Info" action in order to express their view on such "Info" action, including whether the suggested course of action proposed in such "Info" action, would be, in the view of such member, unconstitutional if it were to be enforced by on-chain mechanisms.
Accordingly, we are exercising our right under Article VII, Section 4, and it is our view that the “2025 Net Change Limit” Info Action would not violate constitutional principles if it were to be enforced by on-chain mechanisms, and, in setting a Net Change Limit, this Info Action seeks to satisfy a constitutional prerequisite for the passing of a budget.
There are no other significant constitutional constraints on a Net Change Limit Info Action.
The “2025 Net Change Limit” Info Action is consistent with all constitutional requirements, and Input | Output supports the 2025 Net Change Limit.
- Intersect Constitutional Council85c47dd4…bf64NoExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale
The Intersect Constitutional Council votes that the net change limit info action (9b62b3c632f329...70f9#0) is unconstitutional.
The governance action proposes a net change limit of 350 million ada for the year 2025. This is the second info action to propose a net change limit, an off-chain parameter to establish the maximum amount of treasury withdrawals allowed for any given period, the year 2025 in this instance. A net change limit is required by TREASURY-01(a) and TREASURY-02(a) Guardrails as outlined in Appendix I Section 3.
The proposal format meets the required standards as outlined in Article III Section 5. It follows a standardised and legible format including a URL and hash of documented off-chain content. The rationale also includes a title, abstract, reason for the proposal and relevant supporting materials. On the subject of the supporting materials, it was noted that this proposal sets a high standard in this area. All provided materials are hosted via IPFS and economic models are provided in both CSV and PDF format. The provision of PDF versions help make the economic models more accessible as well as providing a snapshot of the accompanying CSV files, which could be altered or extended upon in the future.
The Council has always weighed the importance of procedural correctness along with considering the levels of verifiability and immutability of proposals and their supporting materials.
There was a potential issue raised regarding the wording of the proposal. It proposes that, “The 2025 Net Change Limit will begin at the start of Epoch 532 and continue for 72 epochs, finishing at the conclusion of Epoch 604 in December 2025”. It was noted that by including Epoch 604 up to its conclusion, as in this current wording, it would make the net change limit duration 73 epochs and not 72 epochs. It would also extend past the year 2025 and run into the first week of the year 2026.
The contradicting timelines and the ambiguity caused by not knowing which one was intended raised the question of to what extent does the Constitutional Committee have the power to make the decision regarding which one is correct based on information not contained in the proposal. We believe that making a decision on which version was intended in the text is outside of the Constitutional Committee power. The responsibility of the ambiguity created by this error lies with the proposers and therefore it should be resubmitted without errors.
The Council was able to reach out to the author of the proposal who confirmed that this was indeed a typing error and that the epoch range specified in the proposal was incorrect by one epoch. The intention of the proposed timeline was made clear by the author but they also acknowledged that the Council could consider the presence of the error enough to be an issue.
The Council has voted unconstitutional due to the ambiguity caused by the mismatch between yearly calendar and provided epoch timeline. Should this proposal be resubmitted with the error corrected, the Council would consider it to be constitutional.
- Eastern Cardano Council2ea7a78e…10ecAbstainExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale
We have determined that this Info action does not meet the criteria deemed necessary for the Constitutional Committee to assess its constitutionality.
Article VII, Section 1 of the Cardano Constitution states "The Constitutional Committee shall comprise a set of owners of ada that is collectively responsible for ensuring that on-chain governance actions prior to enactment on-chain, are constitutional."
Additionally; Article VII, Section 4, Paragraph 2 states "Because "Info" actions have no on-chain effect and, accordingly, are neither constitutional nor unconstitutional, Constitutional Committee members may not prevent “Info” actions from being recorded on-chain. Members of the Constitutional Committee may nevertheless record a vote on-chain regarding an "Info" action in order to express their view on such "Info" action, including whether the suggested course of action proposed in such "Info" action, would be, in the view of such member, unconstitutional if it were to be enforced by on-chain mechanisms."
Finally; Article VII, Section 4, Paragraph 3 states "In the case of "Info" actions that propose a Cardano Blockchain ecosystem budget, Constitutional Committee members shall record a vote on-chain that sets forth their opinion as to whether the proposed budget, if it were to be implemented in the form contained in the "Info" action, would violate this Constitution."
The governance action with ID "9b62b3c632f329...70f9#0" and title "2025 Net Change Limit", as an Info governance action, does not relate to a budget proposal, nor does it gauge sentiment towards another type of governance action which could be enacted on-chain, so the Constitutional Committee is not empowered to assess its constitutionality, ensuring DReps and SPOs are the only ones able to influence its outcome.
We therefore Abstain.
We abstain from assessing the constitutionality of this governance action.