Fee & Governance

The LEA protocol features a dual-layered economic and governance model that mirrors its architecture. The native $LEA coin secures the base consensus layer and governs protocol-wide standards, while each Programmable Object Domain (POD) is free to implement its own sovereign tokenomics and governance, creating a rich and diverse ecosystem.


The $LEA Coin: Securing the Foundation

The $LEA coin is the native asset of the consensus layer, with its primary utility focused on securing the network and governing its core functions.

Utility of $LEA:


POD-Level Economic Autonomy

LEA’s architecture grants complete economic sovereignty to each POD. This flexibility allows developers to design sustainable models tailored to their specific application, rather than being constrained by a global, one-size-fits-all model.

The Value-Capture Fee Model: Aligning Developer and User Incentives

LEA introduces a novel fee model designed to reward developers for creating value without creating perverse incentives. Instead of a fee-sharing model based on gas (which would incentivize inefficient code), LEA separates the network fee from an optional developer fee.

  1. Network Gas Fee: This is the standard fee paid to validators for processing a transaction. It is based on the computational resources (gas) consumed. 100% of this fee goes to the validator to secure the network.
  2. Developer Value-Capture Fee: A developer can choose to add a small, fixed fee to their smart contracts. This fee is defined by the developer (e.g., 0.01 USDC) and is paid directly to their address upon execution.

This model aligns incentives:

The LEA SDK and wallet tooling will enforce transparency, explicitly showing users both the network fee and the developer fee before a transaction is signed.

Programmable Economic Policies:

Beyond the Value-Capture fee, the logic for transaction fees is defined entirely within a POD’s Decoder contract, enabling a wide range of innovative models:


Dual-Layer Governance

Governance on LEA operates on two distinct levels:

  1. Protocol Governance (LIPs):
    • Scope: Affects the entire LEA network. This includes the consensus engine, the WASM runtime, the staking module, and other core components.
    • Participants: $LEA coin holders and validators.
    • Mechanism: A formal, on-chain voting process based on staked $LEA to approve or reject LIPs.
  2. POD Governance (Application-Level):
    • Scope: Affects only a single POD. This includes upgrading the POD’s Decoder, changing its fee model, or managing its treasury.
    • Participants: Defined by the POD’s own rules. Participants could be holders of the POD’s native token, members of a multi-sig, or even whitelisted addresses.
    • Mechanism: Implemented entirely within the POD’s smart contracts. A POD could use a simple multi-sig, a complex DAO with token-weighted voting, or have no governance at all (i.e., be an immutable contract).

This dual structure ensures that the core protocol remains stable and secure under the stewardship of $LEA stakeholders, while individual applications (PODs) retain the autonomy to innovate and govern themselves as they see fit.