Loan ₳5,000,000 to Expand Cardano's Global Listings
6 of 6 committee members voted
- Cardano Japan Council725d4d44…7b31YesExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
We consider this governance action to be constitutional.
We consider this governance action to be acceptable as a treasury withdrawal proposal. (Article 3, Section 5) The form and theoretical basis are stated. (Article 4, Section 2) INTERSECT is designated as the fund manager. (Article 4, Section 4) The plan and costs for independent auditing are stated. (Article 4, Section 3) The total amount does not exceed the current Net Change Limit (NCL). (Article 4, Section 5) It is explicitly stated that the execution and oversight will be performed by the TRSC and PSSC.
This proposal is deemed constitutional as it was determined not to violate the Constitution.
- Eastern Cardano Council2ea7a78e…10ecYesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
We have determined that this treasury withdrawal governance action is constitutional.
The governance action with ID "gov_action1q0m...zuxfxz" and title "Loan ₳5,000,000 to Expand Cardano's Global Listings" is a Treasury Withdrawal, so is subject to the following sections and guardrails in the Cardano Constitution.
ARTICLE III, Section 5 of the Cardano Constitution states "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."
This governance action includes a valid URL and hash, which matches the hash of the off-chain documentation referenced. The rationale also meets the minimum content specified in this section.
Additionally; ARTICLE IV, Section 3, Paragraph 1 states "Withdrawals from the Cardano Blockchain treasury that would cause the Cardano Blockchain treasury balance to violate the then applicable net change limit shall not be permitted."
The net change limit in effect at the time of submission of this vote on-chain, is the governance action with ID "gov_action1nd3...md2k80".
- A. Current NCL Amount: 350000000 ada
- B. Current NCL Time Period: Epoch 532 to epoch 604 (Inclusive)
- C. Total of Treasury Withdrawals within the Current NCL Time Period: 272031507 ada
- D. Amount of this Treasury Withdrawal: 5000000 ada
- E. "C" plus "D" = 277031507 ada
- F. "A" minus "E" = 72968493 ada
As the value of "F" is greater than or equal to zero, this governance action does not violate the net change limit and therefore fulfils the requirement in this section.
Additionally; ARTICLE IV, Section 4 states "Any governance action requesting ada from the Cardano Blockchain treasury shall require an allocation of ada as a part of such funding request to cover the cost of periodic independent audits and the implementation of oversight metrics as to the use of such ada. Contractual obligations governing the use of ada received from the Cardano Blockchain treasury pursuant to a Cardano Blockchain ecosystem budget shall include dispute resolution provisions."
This governance action specifies that "An allocation of 30-50k ada per year will be reserved out of the 5M for yearly independent external audit reports" which fulfils the requirements in this section.
Additionally; Article VII, Section 6 states "Any ada received from a Cardano Blockchain treasury withdrawal, so long as such ada is being held directly or indirectly by an administrator prior to further disbursement, must be kept in one or more separate accounts that can be audited by the Cardano Community, and such accounts shall not be delegated to an SPO but must be delegated to the predefined auto abstain voting option."
This governance action specifies the following withdrawal address, which at the time of assessment was not delegated to an SPO and is delegated to the auto abstain voting option:
- stake17xzc8pt7fgf0lc0x7eq6z7z6puhsxmzktna7dluahrj6g6ghh5qjr
Finally; the guardrails that require consideration for this governance action are TREASURY-01a, TREASURY-02a, TREASURY-03a and TREASURY-04a. These are addressed as follows:
- TREASURY-01a - The net change limit with governance action ID "gov_action1nd3...md2k80" is currently in effect, after being "agreed by the DReps via an on-chain governance action with a threshold of greater than 50% of the active voting stake".
- TREASURY-02a - As per the above assessment, this treasury withdrawal does not exceed the current net change limit.
- TREASURY-03a - This treasury withdrawal is denominated in ada.
- TREASURY-04a - This governance action specifies that it relates to the budget in governance action "gov_action1jr8...c9uldx", which was "agreed by the DReps with a threshold of greater than 50% of the active voting stake".
We therefore find this governance action Constitutional.
This governance action sufficiently fulfils the criteria specified for treasury withdrawals in the Cardano Constitution, so is deemed constitutional.
- KtorZ64f97568…3a49YesExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
🐍
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
My original intention was to declare this proposal UNCONSTITUTIONAL due to a violation of Article IV - Section 1 which demands that withdrawal proposals "give effect to [..] budgets in effect". However, the current proposal presents a few discrepancies with its original budget:
No contractual obligation to return the borrowed funds back to the treasury. The only highlighted obligation is to CDH, which is not Cardano's treasury.
No 'continuous repayment' of the loan clearly defined but instead, only a vague commitment to propose a repayment schedule after 3 years.
None of the shared documents / agreements is final, have dates or signatures from any of the involved parties.
So, in its current state, the withdrawal does not in fact give effect to its budget for it is changing the agreed upon rules and leave blanks in places that require clarity.
However, while unusual, IntersectMBO has shared (https://x.com/IntersectMBO/status/1991093096017514571) precisions on the current proposals addressing the points raised above, as well as a few others. In particular, the document states that IntersectMBO will "publish the final loan agreement [..] prior to any first disbursement from the Treasury Reserve Smart Contract to the Snek Foundation’s project-specific contract". This memo has been anchored on-chain at slot 171991447 under the transaction 78feee8bb9435f445f204d72e9d2ac827858c94863b2a34c41d60d7b337fc0ef.
I recognise that all this isn't quite conventional, but I firmly believe that the CC exists specifically for cases that aren't quite conventional (where an automated process would suffice).
Under these new terms, and all else being otherwise okay, the proposal thereby appears CONSTITUTIONAL.
- Phil_uplc68bb0b42…8746YesExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
The proposal is constitutional.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
The proposal doesn't clearly violate any binary criteria laid out in the constitution.
- Tingvard646d1b3a…be43YesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
Tingvard judge the “₳5,000,000 Loan for Cardano Global Listing Expansion – Snek Foundation” treasury withdrawal governance action constitutional.
This governance action is properly framed as a treasury withdrawal under Article IV. It requests 5,000,000 ada for execution of the Cardano Global Listing Expansion initiative, a loan-based program designed to increase Cardano’s exchange visibility and liquidity through SNEK’s proven listing track record. Under Article IV, § 1, treasury withdrawals must correspond to an approved budget. This action directly follows the approved budget Info action gov_action1jr8...c9uldx, satisfying this requirement. The governance action meets Article IV, § 2 by specifying that Intersect shall administer the loan under the treasury-contracts framework. This framework includes Project-Specific Smart Contracts (PSSCs), milestone-based disbursement, delivery assurance, and an Oversight Committee. These mechanisms collectively meet the constitutional expectations for accountability, structured administration, and transparent fund handling. The proposal satisfies Article IV, § 4, which requires independent audits and oversight metrics for treasury-funded activity. The action allocates annual resources for external audits and mandates bi-yearly public reporting, including KPIs, expenditure summaries, receipts where permitted, and documentation of exchange engagement procedures. These measures are aligned with the Constitution’s transparency and auditing requirements. The custody and delegation rules in Article IV, § 5 are also satisfied. Funds held in the Treasury Reserve Smart Contract (TRSC) and PSSCs cannot be delegated to a stake pool and will instead be delegated to the auto-abstain predefined DRep. This is explicitly reiterated in the action’s description of TRSC/PSSC mechanics. The governance action further aligns with the Tenets of Article I, particularly Tenet 9, by promoting long-term sustainability and fairness through a loan rather than a grant structure. The repayable design introduces an accountability model consistent with constitutional principles of responsible treasury use, especially given the scale of the withdrawal.
Tingvard judge this treasury withdrawal governance action constitutional. It conforms to the requirements of Article IV, §§ 1–5, respects the Cardano Blockchain Tenets, and implements a structured, auditable, contract-based loan administration that ensures transparency, oversight, and safeguarding of treasury funds. The action represents an evolution in treasury use that remains fully consistent with constitutional standards.
- Ace Alliance71aa5b3a…8f04AbstainActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
We abstain on the “Loan ₳5,000,000 to Expand Cardano’s Global Listings” TWGA because of direct involvement in shaping the off-chain loan contract between Snek Foundation and Intersect.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
Ace Alliance is abstaining on the “Loan ₳5,000,000 to Expand Cardano’s Global Listings” Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action because members of our consortium have been directly involved in shaping the off-chain loan contract between the Snek Foundation and Intersect.
One of the largest constitutional questions raised around this governance action pertains to whether the final loan agreement properly implements the terms described in the on-chain Budget Info Action (gov_action1jr8...c9uldx) and Treasury Withdrawal, and whether it satisfies requirements such as:
The identity between on-chain content and final off-chain implementation (Article III, Section 5); and
The requirement that contractual obligations govern the use of ada received from the Treasury under the approved budget (Article IV, Section 4).
Those questions are not abstract. They turn on the specific language, structure, and enforcement mechanics of the very contract that several Ace Alliance members have helped discuss, review, or shape in collaboration with the Snek Foundation, Intersect and other Cardano institutions.
In that context, we do not believe it is appropriate for Ace Alliance to:
Participate deeply in crafting or refining the legal instrument, and then
Turn around and present ourselves as an independent constitutional reviewer of that same instrument.
Even if we could, in principle, draw a sharp internal line between our “participant” role and our “reviewer” role, we are concerned that this would undermine the perceived integrity of the constitutional process. The Cardano community should not have to guess where our institutional involvement ends and our constitutional judgment begins when they are, in this particular case, so tightly intertwined.
Ace Alliance will abstain on the “Loan ₳5,000,000 to Expand Cardano’s Global Listings” Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action because our members have been substantively involved in shaping the final loan contract between the Snek Foundation and Intersect, and we do not consider it appropriate to conduct the constitutional analysis of a legal instrument we had influence over. Our abstention is a procedural decision rooted in conflict-of-interest and process integrity, and should not be interpreted as either support for or opposition to the constitutional merits of the governance action itself.