Reward full priority fee to validator
- Idea
- Draft
- Review
- Accept
- Implement
- Active
Decision brief
Why this proposal matters
Reward 100% of priority fee to validator.
Proposal at a glance
What changes
- When calculate fee for SanitizedMessage, it should separate prioritization_fee from transaction fee.
- change FeeStructure.calculate_fee()
- During fee collection, priority fees are accumulated separately from transaction fees;
Stakeholder map
Who is affected
Builders & client teams Impact unknown
No proposal-specific evidence was found for this group.
Action requirement unknownValidators & operators Medium impact
The implemented proposal aims to enhance incentives for validators to prioritize transactions with higher priority fees, thereby providing more substantial compensation for the validators' efforts in processing higher-paying transactions.
Action requirement unknownUsers & stakers Medium impact
The implemented proposal aims to enhance incentives for validators to prioritize transactions with higher priority fees, thereby providing more substantial compensation for the validators' efforts in processing higher-paying transactions.
Action requirement unknownGovernance & ecosystem Medium impact
The implemented proposal aims to enhance incentives for validators to prioritize transactions with higher priority fees, thereby providing more substantial compensation for the validators' efforts in processing higher-paying transactions.
Action requirement unknownExact source revision
Full proposal document
0616093b2952Summary
Reward 100% of priority fee to validator.
Motivation
To better align validator incentives, priority fee should change from current 50% burn 50% reward to 100% reward to validator.
Alternatives Considered
Current 50-50% model is an alternative, which does not fully align with validator's incentive, and encourages side deals.
New Terminology
None
Detailed Design
When calculate fee for
SanitizedMessage, it should separate prioritization_fee from transaction fee.- change
FeeStructure.calculate_fee()
- change
During fee collection, priority fees are accumulated separately from transaction fees;
- change
bank.collector_feesandbank.filter_program_errors_and_collect_fee()
- change
When distributing collected fees, the collector_id receives the sum of priority fees. Logic for distributing base transaction fees is unchanged.
- Change
bank.distribute_transaction_fee()
- Change
No change to fee payer account validation;
No change to how much transaction would be paying in total;
Impact
The implemented proposal aims to enhance incentives for validators to prioritize transactions with higher priority fees, thereby providing more substantial compensation for the validators' efforts in processing higher-paying transactions.
Security Considerations
None
Drawbacks
By paying the complete priority fee to their own accounts, leaders can now inflate the reported priority fees in their blocks artificially, incurring minimal costs. Previously, burning a portion of the priority fees deincentivized such behavior. The artificial inflation of fees could lead wallets to overestimate the required priority fee.
Backwards Compatibility
The implementation of this proposal necessitates the use of a feature gate. Although there will be no alteration to the transaction submitter's payment structure, the software incorporating the proposal will allocate a greater portion of fees to the leader compared to other versions. Consequently, a feature gate is essential to ensure that all validators transition to the new functionality at the epoch boundary, thereby preserving consensus.
Evidence graph
Related proposals and rollout
One or more sources are unavailable.
Upstream review record
Upstream discussion & review
One or more sources are unavailable.
Provenance
Evidence & technical details
Rollout or chain data, source revisions, freshness and integrity. 2
Provenance
Evidence & technical details
Rollout or chain data, source revisions, freshness and integrity.SIMD
Deployment Status
3opE3EzAKnUftUDURkzMgwpNgimBAypW1mNDYH4x4Zg7Exact source revision
Sources & integrity
- Proposal document pinned_commit_blob
0616093b2952ed6de52c4a27d66aadd11d48d4f9 - simd-document document · current · Sep 11, 2026
0616093b2952ed6de52c4a27d66aadd11d48d4f9
One or more sources are unavailable.
One or more sources are unavailable.
simd.watch community discussion · SIMD-0096
Powered by Giscus · Sign in with GitHub to comment
Community comments load when this section approaches the viewport.