Should we raise the 2026–27 Net Change Limit to 500M ada?

The current Net Change Limit for epochs 613–713 is 350M ada, and enacted treasury withdrawals have already consumed about 291M (≈83%) with a large part of the period still ahead of us. A new Info action now proposes raising the ceiling to 500M, arguing that the practical room under 350M has become too constrained.

A few angles to weigh:

• Raise to 500M: avoids a mid-period freeze on otherwise-worthy proposals; reflects real funding demand.
• Hold at 350M: the limit only means something if we don't move it whenever it binds; predictability protects the treasury.
• Tighten instead: keep 350M but prioritise harder for the remaining headroom.

Questions for DReps:

1. Is 350M actually too low for this period, or is the pressure a signal to prioritise better?
2. If we raise it once, what stops the next period from doing the same?
3. What would you want to see (spending breakdown, forecast, guardrails) before voting yes or no?

We've already played fast and loose with the treasury this year. We haven't had any sort of coordinated budgeting, a procurement process which had any leverage in negotiating with vendors nor a holistic view on how to manage a budget essentially for a nation.

Running out of budget would be the most natural thing in this situation and at least will force us to look at how we should improve the process next year. If however we do the opposite, it shows that continuing to bilk the Treasury for as much as one can grab while it is still there, is the optimal strategy. This is obviously bad for the chain and ecosystem.

Raising the NCL would only accelerate the rush to raid the treasury we have seen this year. I can't support that.

Update, for context.

When I first posted this, the NCL-raise action stood on its own. It is now directly tied to a live withdrawal, so here is a factual status update.

Both actions are currently voting, and on-chain they were submitted from the exact same return address (connected to Midgrad Labs, as Dave confirmed on X):

• Raise the 2026-27 Net Change Limit from 350M to 500M ada (Info action, epoch 640)
• Withdraw 120M ada for AlphaGrowth's Cardano Prime (Treasury Withdrawal, epoch 642)

The two are also linked mechanically: most of the current 350M limit for this period is already allocated, and the headroom left is well below 120M. Under the current cap the AlphaGrowth withdrawal cannot be enacted. Raising the limit to 500M is what creates the room for it.

My own view, I would vote yes on the AlphaGrowth withdrawal on its own merits, but no on raising the Net Change Limit to make space for it. A Net Change Limit is meant to be a ceiling the ecosystem plans within, not a number we lift whenever one large request does not fit underneath it. If the cap goes up every time a big withdrawal arrives, it stops meaning anything. (which would be a discussion in and of itself: should the NCL be removed entirely?)

Reasonable people can weigh these two differently.

No. I will not approve 500M ADA.

The NCL was meant to fund 18 months. We have already allocated roughly two-thirds of it, yet too much of that money appears to have gone out without proper due diligence, RFPs, RFQs, meaningful comparison of alternatives, or clear measures of value delivered. The standard seems to be “the idea sounds good, let's fund it.”

That is precisely why I oppose raising the ceiling.** If we cannot demonstrate discipline with the budget already approved, handing over another 150M ADA rewards the behaviour that created the shortfall. **And so will the next request for raising it beyond 500M ADA!

We need to get a dashboard, a clear picture for the treasury funded projects:

• What has been approved, committed, paid, and reserved?
• What concrete deliverables, milestones, and outcomes were agreed?
• Which projects are on budget, late, failing, or no longer strategically justified?
• What procurement process was used, and what alternatives were assessed?
• Why can the remaining period not be funded within the current limit?

I support a maximum NCL of 350M ADA for 2026–27. That means hard choices. Stop weak projects. Freeze discretionary allocations. Fund only work with defined outcomes, accountable owners, and public reporting. And that message goes directly to the big spenders as listed on https://governance.cardano-visualisation.com/. Yoroi and YUTA both voted YES on some 700M ADA withdrawals!!! In six months!!! On a NCL of 350M ADA!!! Talk about RESPONSIBILITY and FINANCIAL DILIGENCE!

The treasury is not a bottomless funding source for every appealing proposal. If only 50M ADA is truly left for the next 12 months, then that is the budget. Make it work.