Some of the links on this site may be affiliate links. ICOBench may receive advertising commissions when users visit recommended platforms via our affiliate links, at no additional cost to you. All recommendations are based on a comprehensive review process. 
Ethereum will not include EIP-8363 in the Hegotá upgrade after the proposal’s six authors withdrew it on October 1, 2026. Jérôme de Tychey, president of Ethereum France and one of the authors, announced the decision on the Ethereum Magicians forum.
The withdrawal leaves ETH staking rewards, validator economics, and ETH issuance unchanged for now, while moving the debate over the network’s issuance policy into a separate process.
The proposal had drawn more than 200 comments within a few weeks, reaching 224 by October 1. Hegotá’s scheduled headliners remain FOCIL and Frame Transactions. Two proposals were rated as essential by Ethereum Foundation protocol teams; consequently, the suggested staking-reward burn remains beyond this upgrade’s scope.
The withdrawal comes as Ethereum’s upgrade roadmap continues to develop, including the Glamsterdam and Sepolia upgrade processes. EIPs can also follow different paths through testing and review before an upgrade includes them, as illustrated by Ethereum’s EIP-8411 proposal.
📋Withdrawing EIP-8363 from consideration for Hegotá.
EIP-8363 rapidly became one of the most commented-on EIPs in the history of the Ethereum-Magicians forum, with 200+ comments in a few weeks. As we progressed through the Hegotà CFI (Consideration For Inclusion) process,… https://t.co/VjoEW11OYH pic.twitter.com/Lp7spyZk0p
— Jerome de Tychey 🦇🔊 (@jdetychey) October 1, 2026
You’re Still Early: 10 AI Agent Coins That Could Win Big Next Bullrun
Ethereum EIP-8363: Staking Issuance Policy at the Center of the Debate
EIP-8363 would have changed how Ethereum issues rewards to validators by burning a portion of each validator’s staking rewards at every epoch. Its authors considered the issue too significant, and the concerns it raised too broad, for a decision made as part of scoping a single upgrade.
That distinction matters for ETH holders and stakers: withdrawing the proposal is not the same as adopting its design or ending discussion of issuance. No change to current staking yields, validator rewards or ETH supply mechanics follows from this withdrawal.
The Proposed Burn Would Have Increased With Staked ETH
The burn share would have grown as more ETH entered staking, reaching 100% once about 60.25 million ETH was staked, roughly half the supply. Beyond that threshold, staked ETH would have earned no issuance rewards under the proposal.
The authors argued that the existing issuance curve maintains a yield floor near 1.5% regardless of how much ETH is staked. At the 33% staking ratio cited in EIP-8363, however, the proposed burn would have cut net yield from about 2.6% to 1.2%; the reduction was designed to phase in over 18 months.
Those figures describe a proposal, not a change now in force. With EIP-8363 withdrawn from Hegotá, there is no immediate reduction in validator rewards or staking yield. Ethereum’s ETH issuance mechanics remain unchanged for now.
Sign Up With MergeX And Trade CryptoA Separate Process Will Carry the Issuance Debate Forward
The authors plan to pursue a separate issuance process, with a published schedule running from November to EthCC in April, where they aim to engage core developers again. De Tychey thanked Lido and others for offering to help steer the work, but the timeline does not establish that a revised proposal will be adopted or included in a particular upgrade.
The proposal first appeared on August 4 as EIP-8361, two days before the deadline for new Hegotá proposals, and De Tychey presented it on the August 6 consensus call. A Lido representative requested withdrawal from Hegotá, citing potential issuance changes in future forks and insufficient time for counter-proposals.
For ETH staking participants, the immediate outcome is continuity rather than a new supply shock: the proposed reward burn is off the Hegotá agenda, while the broader policy question remains open. The next consequential signal will be whether the separate process produces a revised design capable of winning broader scrutiny before any future fork decision.
Don’t Miss: ICOBench Experts Call the Next 1000x Crypto Coins for 2027
