BIP 2 - Directing CA mint fee to miners


BIP#: BIP - 2
Title: Directing the CA mint cost to miners
Author(s): Amir, Raskul, Gus
Contributors: Alex Romanov, Valdok
Tags: minting, CA
Type: BIP A (Regular proposal)
Status: Community Vote (offchain)
Date Proposed: 2022-05-09
Date Ratified: N/A
Dependencies: Bip - 1
Replaces: N/A


Sentence Summary

  • Confidential Asset minting fees to be distributed to miners

Paragraph Summary

  • When a new confidential asset is created the fee to create the asset is currently locked. This proposal is to change this so the BEAM fee is distributed to the miner or pool who mined the block relevant to the creation of the asset. This fee will be inline with that decided in BIP 1.

Component Summary

  • The initial block reward mined + CA minting fee would be the amount of Beam mined in the block which confirms the creation of the CA. .


  • This would encourage further decentralization of the Beam network by rewarding miners with ‘bonus blocks’ when a CA is minted.

Specification / Proposal Details

Where the community have offered feedback on this proposal, it has been seen as a positive move forwards for Beam. with a view to empowering miners and rewarding them further for securing the Beam network. Alternative options discussed did not provide a reward and depending on the fee amount to create a confidential asset, other proposals may or may not have had any impact whatsoever on the Beam network. This proposal acts as both an encouragement to miners and a valid contribution to the network, in creating a confidential asset.

As with BIP 1 the vote will be conducted in the forum below to allow for the change to come with the Hardfork. The vote will run from today until Friday 1 PM GMT.

Direct CA Mint Fee to Miners:

  • Yes - CA fee to be distributed to the miner or pool
  • No - keep the current system where the BEAM is locked

0 voters


Let’s keep this locked for now. If we accumulate some reasonable amount we can decide what to do with that later on. We don’t need this decision right now.

We could fund some marketing campaign, we can envelope it to the community (through different channels - not just telegram), and some of you might have batter ideas in year or two.

A change in this will require another hard fork, this is why the decision is being voted on now. please vote accordingly. This vote will be final.

With the Beams locked, they are not usable, will never be usable and will be considered ‘burned’ - There is no returning to a pot of Beams used as CA fee, to decide what to do with them later. It cannot be ‘enveloped’ - it’s literally a burning of Beam.

The intent to include it in miners block rewards is to encourage further security of the Beam network and entice more miners to join and secure the proof of work, of Beam. I think this should clarify some of the confusion in Beam_Sport comment above.


In that case can we store these tokens in a way were we will be able to decide where they would go through DAO voting?

In other words, can we have have tird option which will represent community found. This fund could be used only through DAO voting?

Not really. No.
We have had a couple of months of discussion in regard to these BIPs and that idea was never mooted.

The options are 1 or 2.
Encourage more miners to secure the Beam network by incorporating the fee as a block reward, or keep it as is, where the Beams are - for all intent and purpose, burned.

I hope common sense is realised and that the fee goes to encourage better network security, rather than just burning /locking what will inevitably be a very small amount of Beam.

That said, i will of course respect the result of the vote.

If this ideas hasn’t been proposed before it doesn’t have to be bad idea.

I have opened new topic for discussion on this topic.

I wasn’t intimating that it was a bad idea. Merely that the discussion has been going on for a while in preperation to this vote, and it wasn’t mentioned before now.
The idea may have been valid, but consultation period had to end sooner or later and we need to now move forward.

Thanks for your input. You can contribute with your thoughts on dedicated topic.

On the side note, whenever some community member has raised hypothetical question / idea your communication was halting that idea and discarding it (as observed in telegram channels and here). For example, you could have been more useful in this conversation here if you have instructed me to open separate topic where community would discuss this idea together.


Supports distribution to miners, which can further improve the computing power of the network to ensure the security of the network,