This Info action proposes setting a Net Change Limit of 350 million ADA, defining the maximum amount of ADA that may be withdrawn from the Cardano treasury during Epochs 613–713. The NCL is intended to function as a fiscal guardrail, constraining treasury withdrawals and supporting disciplined budget governance under the current on-chain governance framework.
Assessment: Conditional
Assessment: Mixed
Assessment: Medium
| Dimension | Score (1–5) |
|---|---|
| Constitutional clarity | 2 |
| Governance quality | 3 |
| Execution credibility | 3 |
| Ecosystem value | 4 |
| Risk balance | 3 |
This Info action proposes setting a Net Change Limit (NCL) of 350 million ADA for Epochs 613–713 (approximately 16 months and 20 days).RCADA recognises that a Net Change Limit remains a constitutionally required guardrail under the current treasury withdrawal framework and that the proposer has attempted to provide a clear fiscal boundary following the recent enactment of Constitution v2.4. We also note the pragmatic attempt to adjust the previous NCL benchmark for the decline in ADA price and the longer period.However, RCADA must apply the same high-bar lens we have used for other significant governance actions: changes that affect treasury access and spending discipline must be both technically accurate and accompanied by demonstrable improvements in process quality, accountability, and decentralisation resilience.Three issues prevent us from endorsing this proposal as submitted:Constitutional inaccuracy The “Application and Compliance” section still references compliance with “Article IV of the Cardano Constitution” for treasury withdrawal guardrails. Following the ratification of Constitution v2.4 (effective January 24, 2026), Article IV now addresses the Amendment Process. The treasury/budget provisions have moved. This is not a minor typo; it is a material error in a document that is intended to become a binding fiscal constraint. Submitting live governance actions with outdated constitutional references undermines the very legitimacy the Constitution is meant to protect. Lessons from the previous NCL cycle Our voting record shows we voted NO on the 300M and 350M proposals for the first NCL and YES only on the 200M proposal. Those concerns proved justified: the NCL was repeatedly treated as a spending target rather than a cap. We witnessed a frantic end-of-cycle rush in December 2025, a 70M ADA budget withdrawal approved in record time (≈20% of the entire NCL), and even an extension of the NCL itself to accommodate poor timing by key entities. RCADA believes we have not yet had sufficient time or structured review to analyse the real impact and lessons of that cycle before simply rolling into the next one. Process and timing The recent removal of the Budget Info Action requirement has already narrowed early-stage deliberation. Submitting a new NCL proposal that still contains constitutional inaccuracies, without prior community coordination or a pause for post-cycle analysis, risks repeating the same governance-speed-run pattern we saw at the end of 2025.
RCADA has therefore chosen to ABSTAIN.This abstention is not a rejection of the need for a Net Change Limit, nor is it opposition to fiscal discipline. It is a constructive signal that any proposal that sets spending boundaries for the treasury must first be constitutionally accurate, grounded in a clear-eyed review of the previous cycle, and developed with the coordination that the Cardano community has repeatedly asked for.We would welcome a revised version that corrects the Article IV reference, includes a short post-cycle impact summary, and demonstrates that the 350M figure has been stress-tested against realistic spending scenarios under the new constitutional rules. Such a revision would materially increase our level of support.RCADA remains committed to thoughtful, disciplined treasury governance and to protecting the long-term resilience of the Cardano treasury.
RCADA’s full vote assessment can be found here: “https://brolloks.github.io/rcada-drep-votes/.