Net Change Limit of 300 Million ADA for Epochs 613–713
167 DReps voted · 60 with a rationale
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes 11M ₳ No rationale
- No 10.5M ₳ Rationale
The budget in opinion should be lower. We have to really think of being net positive and not over spend. I think the net change limit should be lower.
- Yes 8.8M ₳ Rationale
Net Change Limitは、将来のガバナンスアクションによって見直すことが可能であることを踏まえ、まずはNCLを確立しトレジャリー運用を停滞させないことが重要であると判断し、賛成します。\n\nGiven that a Net Change Limit can be revised through subsequent governance actions, I believe it is important to establish one in order to avoid stalling treasury operations. Therefore, I vote Yes on this proposal.
- Yes 8.1M ₳ No rationale
- No 7.3M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 7.1M ₳ Rationale
A 300M ADA NCL is the more careful choice than than 350M (or 700M): spending more doesn’t magically create more value - it just funds more things while each recipient ends up with ADA that’s worth less. I also don’t treat NCLs as some sacred number. They are a constitution-required snapshot that can be changed later if the majority of DReps want to. So I’m going to focus on disciplined treasury spending: voting No on weak, low-signal proposals (even if they’re under the NCL) and voting Yes on the smaller set of builders most likely to move adoption. What matters is giving the highest value we can to the best teams, not how much ADA we can shovel out.
- Yes 6.2M ₳ No rationale
- Abstain 6M ₳ Rationale
I will continue to abstain. Personally, I do not wish to see this total spend because it's not clear yet where it would go in terms of future proposals and we've not proven yet we've made good use of the prior years NCL/spend. It also doesn't sit right with me that we've not determined a way to make this a hard coded on-chain parameter.
I don't wish to stand in the way of progress so will not block this proposal. I'm not sure what NCL I would be comfortable with this year given what was put forth and ultimately successfully passed for the 2025 year. I'm not afraid to spend and get behind proposals that pass a bit more scrutiny going forward and clearer objectives on how it'll ultimately help boost Cardano's ecosystem and frankly price. For me that'll come in the form of liquidity, integrations that remove barriers to entry and walled off opportunities, and support/security needs for the daily operations of the chain. That may cost 150M, 300M, or 400M at the end of the day.
- Yes 5.5M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 4.8M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 4.5M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 4.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 4.2M ₳ Rationale
[Portuguese]
Optamos por votar "SIM" nesta ação de governança "Net Change Limit of 300 Million ADA for Epochs 613–713" (gov_action1wwjwkg2g0qwr0mehey9r8gwn6qz3r28wl6wdl2s75kfmpy8j87tqqtft9tp), pois o limite anual de gastos do tesouro proposto está alinhado com o nível de responsabilidade financeira esperado pela comunidade. A faixa de 300 milhões de ADA foi definida com base na receita do tesouro em 2025, estimada em 306 milhões de ADA, estabelecendo um parâmetro prudente e sustentável para a gestão dos recursos. Essa definição contribui para garantir a continuidade dos processos de governança e fornece previsibilidade para a construção de um orçamento comunitário estruturado, alinhado às demandas da comunidade Cardano para o período entre as épocas 613 (13 de fevereiro de 2026) e 713 (3 de julho de 2027).
[English]
We chose to vote "YES" on this governance action "Net Change Limit of 300 Million ADA for Epochs 613–713" (gov_action1wwjwkg2g0qwr0mehey9r8gwn6qz3r28wl6wdl2s75kfmpy8j87tqqtft9tp), because the proposed annual treasury spending limit is aligned with the level of financial responsibility expected by the community. The 300 million ADA range was defined based on the treasury revenue in 2025, estimated at 306 million ADA, establishing a prudent and sustainable benchmark for resource management. This definition helps ensure the continuity of governance processes and provides predictability for the development of a structured community budget aligned with the needs of the Cardano community for the period between epoch 613 (February 13, 2026) and epoch 713 (July 3, 2027). - Yes 4.2M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 3.7M ₳ Rationale
I support the allocation of 300 million ADA for a 100 epoch NCL, but I will be highly selective regarding actual treasury withdrawals. As this is essentially the second year of our on chain governance, we have gained substantial insights, leaving no excuses for misallocating community funds.
- No 3M ₳ No rationale
- No 2.8M ₳ Rationale
This proposal does not provide adequate rationale to justify this planned NCL of 300 Million ADA.
Although many see NCL as a spending limit that does not need to be met, functionally it has so far been treated by the community and proposers as a pot of money to be used up every year.
To be fiscally responsible, I would expect there be a concrete plan in place on how this ADA is to be budgeted prior to approving a large spending limit.
A budget serves as a practical and honest way of considering the financial impacts the spending of ADA will have on ADA holders, and without some kind of collaborative community budget presented to support a large NCL of 300 Million ADA cannot support this proposal.
There has been no proof summited to date that we need to spend anywhere close to this NCL amount, and I would have expected a community poll and engagement on this topic before submitting on chain. That way we could have multiple choice options to gauge sentiment on what this level should be.
I would personally expect a NCL of 100 Million ADA or less since there has been no budget submitted.
- Yes 2.7M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 2.7M ₳ No rationale
- No 2.6M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 2.6M ₳ No rationale
- No 2.5M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 2.5M ₳ Rationale
Nice. I think these are sustainable numbers or at least much closer to it.
- No 2.5M ₳ Rationale
今はCardanoが縮小均衡に入る局面ではありません。300M ADAへの引き下げは一見安全に見えますが、戦略的選択肢を不必要に狭める判断だと考えます。NCLは実支出額ではなくガバナンス上の上限であり、規律は個別Withdrawalの運用設計で担保すべきです。NCLを価格連動型にすると、制度設計が短期的な市場変動に左右され、マクロ相場のノイズに振り回されます。ADA価格は市場が決め、NCLはガバナンスが決めるものであり、トレジャリーの受け取り手はADA建ての価格変動リスクを引き受けています。
I am voting NO on reducing the Net Change Limit (NCL) to 300M ADA.
This is not a phase for contraction. While a lower NCL may look safer, it unnecessarily narrows Cardano’s strategic options. The NCL is not actual spending, but a governance-level upper bound, and financial discipline should be enforced through withdrawal-level controls.
Linking the NCL to short-term ADA price movements would allow long-term governance decisions to be driven by market noise. ADA price is set by the market, while the NCL is set by governance. Treasury recipients also accept ADA-denominated price risk as part of their work. - Yes 2.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 2.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 2.1M ₳ Rationale
Vote: YES
This Info Action establishes a Net Change Limit of 300M ADA for Epochs 613–713, aligning closely with the treasury’s historical annual inflows and maintaining a sustainable fiscal guardrail as required by the Cardano Constitution. Setting the NCL near the replenishment rate helps ensure the ecosystem can continue to fund meaningful development without materially depleting the treasury. Strategic investment will be essential to drive adoption, particularly through infrastructure, liquidity growth, and the development of critical components such as stablecoins and financial rails that strengthen Cardano’s position in the broader digital economy. At the same time, the NCL represents a ceiling, not a spending target. Treasury withdrawals must continue to be evaluated carefully, prioritising initiatives that deliver real adoption, infrastructure, and measurable impact for the ecosystem. The treasury should support builders who execute and deliver value, not serve as an open-ended funding mechanism for projects that fail to produce results.
- Yes 2M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1.7M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1.7M ₳ No rationale
- No 1.7M ₳ Rationale
Given current uncertainty I am changing my vote to NO for the sake of stability.
- Abstain 1.5M ₳ No rationale
- No 1.4M ₳ Rationale
Voting for 350M.
- Yes 1.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1.2M ₳ Rationale
I vote YES on the 300M ADA Net Change Limit for Epochs 613–713 because Cardano needs a constitutional NCL in place for this window after the prior 350M proposal for the same epoch range failed CC constitutionality approval (2/3 required, i.e., 5/7). On-chain parameters currently show rho=0.003 and tau=0.20, with reserves around 6.57B ADA and the treasury around 1.63B ADA, meaning the treasury’s reserve-driven inflow is roughly ~3.94M ADA per epoch while the fee component is comparatively small (~13k ADA/epoch at recent levels). Over a 101-epoch window, that implies a rough reserve-driven treasury inflow on the order of 344M ADA, and I prefer 300M as a more prudent ceiling that helps keep the treasury stable as reserves decline over time. An NCL is a cap, not a mandate to spend, and I want withdrawals to remain broadly aligned with sustainable inflows rather than drawing down principal in a weak market. This balance preserves long-term resilience while still leaving meaningful room to invest in high-impact work when it’s justified.
- Yes 1.2M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1M ₳ Rationale
The proposal is the very definition of the fiscal discipline we must demand; by capping the NCL at 300M ADA, which puts us strictly below our annualized treasury inflow, **we force the ecosystem to live within its means and reject the "social welfare" mentality by creating a hard ceiling on treasury withdrawals.
**
For me, the NCL isn't just a bureaucratic parameter update, but the fundamental financial firewall for the Cardano ecosystem for the coming year. As a DRep committed to running this protocol with the rigor of a multinational enterprise rather than a loose collective of hobbyists, this specific Governance Action is the mechanism required to enforce the "business-minded approach" I advocate for as a DRep.In my experience, scarcity breeds quality, and this NCL enforces scarcity. Without this guardrail in place, we leave the door ajar for fiscal irresponsibility. This is not a spending bill; it is a restraint bill that aligns the operational timeline with the mid-year budget season, allowing for logical, data-driven planning rather than ad-hoc chaos.** If we want to stop the treasury from being treated like a bottomless pit, we must first put a lid on it. This proposal is that lid.**
- Yes 1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1M ₳ Rationale
We support the establishment of a Net Change Limit for Epochs 613–713 and vote YES on the proposal setting the limit at 300 million ADA.
This level reflects a prudent and sustainable approach to treasury management by aligning the spending ceiling with the ecosystem’s realized treasury inflows from the previous year. In our view, matching outflows to historical inflows reinforces fiscal discipline, protects long-term sustainability, and reduces the risk of structural overspending.
At current market conditions, 300 million ADA already represents a very substantial budget in USD terms, providing more than sufficient capacity to fund high-impact development, infrastructure, and community initiatives during the proposed period.
We believe that, at this stage of Cardano’s governance evolution, it is important for the community to consciously adopt a more conservative financial posture. Establishing clear and firm limits strengthens confidence in the treasury system and sets a healthy precedent for responsible, long-term-oriented decision-making.
- Yes 985.7K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 955.2K ₳ No rationale
- No 935.4K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 922.9K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 860.4K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 819K ₳ No rationale
- No 818K ₳ Rationale
We have supported the 350 Million NCL. We do not believe that less spending is prudent at this critical time when the ecosystem needs accelerated investment in order to gain exit speed. Not investing enough could kill Cardano.
- Yes 810K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 793K ₳ Rationale
I support the rationale for an NCL that aligns with budget cycle, and prefer a 300M limit vs the prior 350M limit proposed.