Solana’s proposal to double its annual disinflation rate has cleared a governance vote with 67% support, placing the network on course to reduce projected SOL issuance by 18.9 million tokens over six years. Summary 67% of participating SOL backed the faster disinflation schedule, narrowly exceeding the two-thirds requirement. 60.7% of eligible stake participated, comfortably meeting the one-third quorum. SOL inflation would decline twice as fast but retain its existing 1.5% minimum rate. A separate resource-fee proposal failed after receiving 53.9% support. Solana inflation proposal narrowly clears required vote Solana’s official governance dashboard showed that SGP-0002, called Double Disinflation, finished voting with 176.29 million SOL in favor, representing 67% of the participating stake. Another 66.19 million SOL, or 25.16%, opposed the proposal, while 20.63 million SOL, or 7.84%, abstained. Voting participation reached 60.7%, representing 433.49 million SOL and exceeding the one-third quorum required under Solana’s governance rules. Under the Solana governance process, a proposal passes when at least one-third of network stake participates and two-thirds of all participating stake votes in favor. Abstentions count toward both participation and the total used to calculate support, leaving SGP-0002 only slightly above the required 66.67%. The result provides a stake-weighted mandate to proceed with faster disinflation. It does not immediately reduce SOL issuance because an SGP establishes the network’s preferred direction, while a Solana Improvement Document specifies the technical changes required to carry it out. SIMD-0550, written by Helius contributors Lostin and 0xIchigo, would increase the rate at which SOL inflation declines each year from 15% to 30%. Rather than cutting the current inflation rate in half at once, the proposal would make inflation fall twice as fast from its level when the change becomes active. According to the SIMD-0550 specification, Solana would reach its existing terminal inflation rate of 1.5% in about 2.8 years, compared with 5.7 years under the current schedule. The authors estimate that the change would remove 18.9 million SOL from projected issuance over six years, or about 2.6% of the supply expected under the present schedule. Faster disinflation still requires a technical rollout Although the governance dashboard labels SGP-0002 as finalized, SIMD-0550 remained under “Review” in Solana Foundation’s improvement document repository at the time of writing. The document’s feature field also did not identify a completed implementation or an activation schedule. Before mainnet activation, validator clients must add and support a feature gate called double_disinflation_rate. The technical document says the feature would activate at an epoch boundary, with the faster schedule applying to rewards from the following epoch. Developers designed the change to keep issuance continuous at activation, according to SIMD-0550. Solana would re-anchor its inflation formula at the activation slot, preventing an immediate drop in the rate or a retroactive change to rewards already earned. Because inflation rewards affect Solana’s bank capitalization and bank hash, every validator client must calculate the new schedule in the same way. A difference between implementations could cause nodes to arrive at conflicting network states, making the proposal a consensus-level change rather than a simple adjustment to validator settings. The technical document said the feature gate must remain in client software permanently so nodes replaying Solana’s history can apply the correct inflation rate before and after activation. Rewards from completed epochs would remain unchanged. Solana previously considered SIMD-0228, which linked emissions to staking participation instead of following a fixed reduction schedule. The proposal failed to reach quorum in March 2025 after validators and other participants raised concerns about staking income, validator economics and the complexity of the model. SIMD-0550 uses a fixed schedule that does not respond to changes in staking participation. The authors said the design would preserve a predictable inflation path while avoiding a sudden reduction that could place immediate pressure on validator revenue. Resource-fee proposal fails to reach two-thirds support Alongside SGP-0002, Solana voters rejected SGP-0003, the Resource and Inclusion Fee proposal, despite 61.14% participation. The final tally showed 53.9% support, 18.92% opposition, and 27.18% abstentions. Support therefore fell almost 13 percentage points below the two-thirds threshold. SGP-0003 asked validators and delegators to support SIMD-0553, which would replace Solana’s flat base-fee model with a 2,500-lamport inclusion fee and a separate charge based on the resources requested by each transaction. Validators would receive the inclusion and priority fees, while the protocol would burn the full resource-based portion. Solana currently charges a base fee of 5,000 lamports per signature, split equally between burning and payment to the block-producing validator, according to the network’s documentation. Priority fees go entirely to validators. The SIMD-0553 fee model proposed three resource-fee stages. Using May 2026 network activity, its authors estimated daily burns of 1,500 to 1,800 SOL at the first stage, 3,750 to 4,500 SOL at the second, and 7,500 to 9,000 SOL at the final rate. Solana currently burns about 648 SOL per day through its flat fee. Even at the highest proposed rate, the document estimated that the added burn would equal about 0.5% of supply annually against an inflation rate of roughly 3.8%. SIMD-0553 therefore did not project that the fee model alone would make SOL a net-deflationary asset. Transaction costs would also have varied according to the requested network resources. The proposal estimated that a simple validator vote could cost 12.3% less, while one zero-priority Pump.fun swap used as an example could face an increase of 3,150%. Applications setting compute limits well above their actual needs would pay more because the fee would use requested resources rather than the amount ultimately consumed. US-listed Solana products face lower staking income Opposition to both proposals included Solana Company, a Nasdaq-listed digital asset treasury firm trading under the ticker HSDT. In an Aug. 21 statement, the company said it supported lower issuance and resource-based fees as long-term goals but opposed changing two established economic parameters during Solana’s first formal governance cycle. As crypto.news previously reported, Solana Company said institutions rely on stable staking yields and predictable transaction costs when preparing forecasts, audited reports and operating budgets. The company said staking yield represents operating cash flow for some token holders and argued that reopening the established inflation schedule could create uncertainty for institutions evaluating validator operations. It also said variable fees would transfer estimation risk to users and operators before their systems were prepared. “Institutional adoption is a critical driver of Solana’s growth, and institutions make decisions based on consistent, predictable structures,” Solana Company chairman and CEO Joseph Chee said. Faster disinflation could also affect US investors holding staking-based Solana products. The Bitwise Solana Staking ETF held 8.18 million SOL valued at about $622 million as of Aug. 9, with 99% of its assets staked and a reported net staking reward rate of 5.84%, according to a recent Bitwise fund report. Grayscale has separately planned quarterly staking distributions for its Solana Staking ETF. Its filings said shareholder payments would depend on rewards received by the fund, operating costs, management arrangements, and applicable tax treatment. Network use has climbed while Solana considers the lower issuance path. July transactions reached a record 4.2 billion, rising 13.5% from June and about 91% from December 2025, according to an Aug. 25 network activity report. Blockworks data cited in the report also showed 1.32 billion non-vote transactions between Aug. 17 and Aug. 23, the network’s busiest seven-day period on record.
