DRepTalk
Sign in
Enter as DRepEnter as delegatorEnter as SPOEnter as CC memberEnter as proposerRegister as DRep
Governance ActionsDiscussionsDRepsTreasury
Sign in
More ways to sign in
Enter as delegatorEnter as SPOEnter as CC memberEnter as proposerRegister as DRep
Install app

Net Change Limit: Cardano Treasury (Epochs 613-713)

System1mo ago5 posts
Participation54
Reactions01
Last activity3d ago
System1mo ago

On-chain governance action (Info Action).

By this Info action, the DReps agree a new Net Change Limit of 500,000,000 ada (500,000,000,000,000 lovelace) for the Cardano Treasury, for the period beginning at the start of Epoch 613 (February 13, 2026) and ending at the close of Epoch 713 (on or about July 3, 2027). This Net Change Limit is a fixed cap on the total ada removed from the Treasury through Treasury Withdrawals during the period; it does not count Treasury inflows. This is a newly agreed Net Change Limit: it is the applicable Net Change Limit for the period and supersedes any prior Net Change Limit for the same period. Because the period begins at the start of Epoch 613, all Treasury Withdrawals already debited during the period count toward this 500,000,000 ada limit. This Info action records the DReps' agreement to this Net Change Limit when Yes votes exceed 50% of the active voting stake, the threshold TREASURY-01a sets for agreeing a Net Change Limit; it has no direct on-chain effect and does not authorize any Treasury Withdrawal.

  • Proposer return address: stake1u8c9lgcnx2n47m9t2ccufra270d9vfp4updxmgndv4f7hyg8mykgg
  • Deposit: 100,000 ₳
  • Submitted: epoch 640
  • Expires: epoch 647

View in explorer

jonahkochDRepVoted Yes8d ago

I surprised nobody is really discussing the purchasing-power disconnect from when the first NCL was approved.
Feb. 2026 (NCL set) | ADA price | ~$0.30 350M NCL in USD ~$105M
Jul. 2026. (now) | ADA price | ~$0.16 350M NCL in USD ~$56M
Real capacity -47%
The 500M figure is a round number, not a purchasing-power calculation. To fully restore the original ~$105M equivalent at $0.16, you'd need ~650M ADA.

TriangleForcesDRepVoted No7d ago

Cardano’s limited supply is a fundamental factor here. The Treasury and reserve are finite, with a negligible percent of transaction fees flowing back each epoch. Not to mention, no “grant tourist” has ever contributed a dime back into the Treasury.

The NCL isn’t some arbitrary figure; it’s a hard cap rooted in financial discipline. It’s a budgeted amount, not something you adjust on a whim to chase market price fluctuations. Unlike governments, Cardano can’t just print more ADA to fill gaps or counteract purchasing power erosion. One ADA remains one ADA; regardless of USD valuation swings.

If, and that's where the grain separates from the chaff, developers are committed to Cardano’s long-term vision rather than a short-term cash grab, they accept these constraints. Even if ADA tanks to $0.0001, the principle stays: endurance over volatility!

The question on my mind: will we keep rehashing NCL adjustments every time ADA dips? Or will we demand repayment when ADA surges? History says no, so why start now? This is about sticking to a sustainable financial framework, not chasing transient market sentiment.

No from me. Always.

StygDRepVoted No4d ago

From the conclusion of my rationale:

3.0 Conclusion

We vote NO. A ceiling redrawn to fit a spend that is already being decided is a ceiling that has conceded it does not bind, and this arrangement redraws exactly such a ceiling, placing the spend before the constraint, and doing so through an open-ended discretion that any future withdrawal could invoke. The two lines of reasoning in this rationale, one about sequence and one about even-handed treatment of a shared resource, meet at the same conclusion and name the same remedy.

The resubmission that answers both is straightforward to describe: set the net-change limit prospectively, size it to modeled need for the period, and scope it so that any future increase answers a forecast rather than a particular withdrawal waiting on the other side of the vote. Done that way, a ceiling increase is ordinary fiscal stewardship, and this DRep would treat it as such.

LourdeDRepVoted Yes3d ago

What ae the thresholds needed by each voting body (CC, dRep, and SPO) to pass a NCL proposal? I cannot find that information and a lot of time has passed since the last NCL proposal. Any links will be appreciated I noticed the dRep Talk Voting Info nodal does not show the Hash mark indicating threshold .