In a remarkable showcase of on-chain governance, a proposal aimed at cutting Solana’s inflation rate by 80%—identified as SIMD-228—has officially failed to meet the vote threshold required for passage. The motion, which generated extraordinary turnout across the Solana ecosystem, was rejected in the final stages of polling when numerous smaller validators voted “No,” tipping the balance below the necessary 66.67% approval target.
Solana Inflation Remains High
The vote on SIMD-228 was held alongside SIMD-123, both of which concluded with unprecedented levels of participation. According to Laine, a prominent Solana validator, SIMD-228 attracted 74.3% of all eligible stake, while SIMD-123 drew 57.1%. Though SIMD-228 secured a solid 61.39% “Yes” rate, it fell short of the required supermajority. In contrast, SIMD-123 met its threshold and passed with a 74.91% approval rate.
“This has been a massive milestone in Solana governance with absolutely earth-shattering participation and contentious debate,” Laine commented via X. “It is incredible to see this level of investment by so many stakeholders, no matter the outcome one can only be hopeful for our future as an ecosystem!”
The official Solana account celebrated the vote’s magnitude by noting: “Solana SIMD 228 voter turnout was higher than every US presidential election in the last 100 years.”
Such a comparison underscores how deeply this proposal resonated with the network’s broad constituency. Community members, validators, investors, and developers alike engaged in rigorous discussion around its potential impacts on inflation, staking rewards, and the overall health of the chain.
The schism in SIMD-228 voting results has been widely attributed to differing validator incentives and profitability concerns. Ben Sparang, formerly with the Solana Foundation, offered insight: “SIMD-228 votes by stake level tell a decisive story. Large validators are overwhelmingly in favor as they don’t have to worry about their margin of profitability. Small validators are overwhelmingly against as they might not be in business under the new regime.”
Among smaller operators, fears centered on reduced staking rewards if the inflation rate fell sharply. Many predicted that diminished yields could compound their infrastructure costs and force them off the network. Larger validators, who derive much of their income from transaction fees and leader slots, largely supported the proposal under the rationale that a lower inflation rate would help bolster SOL’s long-term value.
Cyphereus Prime (founder of X1, @mrJackLevin) highlighted the potential impact on Solana’s tokenomics, pointing to the significant decrease in future token issuance. “The proposal is to reduce SOL inflation, which is a good idea as it reduces at least $4B in SOL issuance per, stops dilution the supply and reduces sell pressure,” he observed. “The problem is a lot of smaller validators will be forced to leave the network as their staking rewards likely going to be cut, making it too expensive to run their nodes.”
Tushar Jain, co-founder and Managing Partner at Multicoin Capital, lauded the record-breaking turnout and framed it as a milestone for decentralized governance: “SIMD-228 was the biggest crypto governance vote ever—by both number of participants and participating market cap of any ecosystem, chain, or network… If this vote tells us one thing, it’s that the state of the Solana network is strong. This was a meaningful scaling stress test—a social, rather than technical, stress test—and the network passed despite a wide stratification of diverging opinions and interests.”
Jain further underscored how the turnout—over 74% of stake among 910 individual validators—demonstrated Solana’s vibrancy and institutional adoption. While acknowledging that “Yes” votes on SIMD-228 ultimately fell short, he emphasized the importance of the thorough deliberation process and promised to incorporate community feedback for possible future proposals.
At press time, SOL traded at $126.
Featured image from Shutterstock, chart from TradingView.com
Editorial Process for is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.
