Image Credit: Shutterstock
Key Takeaways
- A new Ethereum proposal would let validators vote to redirect up to 10% of staking rewards toward ecosystem funding, binding all validators if a majority agrees.
- That could channel roughly $120 million in ETH annually toward developer tools, security research, and public goods.
- Critics flagged cartelization risk and argued Ethereum should simply cut issuance instead of redirecting it.
A new proposal on Ethereum’s research forum would let validators signal redirect rates between 0% and 10% of staking rewards toward ecosystem funding, with a majority vote making the chosen rate mandatory for all validators.
Posted by Clément Lesaege, founder of Kleros and Proof of Humanity, the proposal introduces a protocol-level mechanism called “validator redirected revenue.”
Lesaege Says Ethereum’s Public Goods Funding Suffers From a Free-Rider Problem
Validators secure Ethereum by locking up ETH, verifying transactions and earning staking rewards in return. The proposal argues that validators are natural long-term stakeholders whose interests align with the health of the broader ecosystem, since more network activity means more ETH burn and potentially higher value for staked ETH.
Lesaege argues that Ethereum currently suffers from a coordination failure. Developer tools, security research, shared infrastructure and public goods all benefit the ecosystem broadly, but no single actor wants to fund them when others can benefit for free.
Lesaege argues that the mechanism could address that deadlock by embedding funding coordination at the protocol level rather than relying on the Ethereum Foundation, donors or a small number of motivated teams. Lesaege wrote in the forum post:
Successfully coordinating shared investment is essential to compete.
Majority Signal Would Make Redirect Mandatory for All Validators
Under the mechanism, validators would signal what percentage of their rewards, from 0% to 10%, they are willing to redirect. If a majority signals a rate above zero, the contribution becomes mandatory for every validator on the network.
Validators would also select preferred funding recipients. Those preferences would be aggregated into a smart contract that distributes redirected funds to chosen addresses, using a process designed to let validators set preferences once rather than vote on every grant.
The proposal estimates that at current staking levels, validators receive roughly 700,000 ETH per year in rewards. A 5% to 10% redirect could send between 50,000 and 70,000 ETH annually toward ecosystem funding, worth about $120 million at current ETH prices.
Critics Warn of Cartelization and Principal-Agent Risks
Community reaction has been mixed. Some participants on social media described the mechanism as a tax, pointing to frustration with the Ethereum Foundation’s prior ETH sales. Via Network’s Romano wrote:
So paying taxes now? After the Ethereum Foundation kept dumping their own Ethereum.
The proposal also flags three structural risks. The first is validator cartelization, where a coordinated majority could raise the redirect rate and route funds toward themselves or favored parties.
The second is a principal-agent gap: most ETH is not staked directly by its owners but through liquid staking protocols, staking firms or exchanges. Those operators may control the funding preferences, but the lost yield comes from rewards that belong to the delegating ETH holders.
The third concern is an issuance question. If validators are willing to give up part of their rewards, critics could argue Ethereum should simply reduce issuance rather than redirect it.
The proposal is at an early discussion stage on Ethereum’s research forum and has not moved to a formal governance vote.
