Odaily reported that Trent Van Epps, a former Ethereum Foundation member and Ethereum core developer, published a long-form analysis examining the evolution of Ethereum’s institutional structure. The article discusses Ethereum’s future political-economic path and the question of “institutional succession,” describing the network as entering a decisive institutional turning point. According to the piece, the main issues now include the distribution of legitimacy, changes in governance structure and a protocol funding crisis.
The Institutional Tension Behind Ethereum Foundation’s “Subtraction” Approach
Van Epps wrote that the Ethereum Foundation has long followed a philosophy of “subtraction.” Under this approach, the foundation has sought to reduce its centralized influence over the ecosystem and allow more value to be created outside the foundation itself. The strategy has helped reduce concentration of power, but the analysis also says it has produced unclear boundaries around legitimacy, making it difficult for the ecosystem to naturally form alternative institutional centers.
In this framing, the Ethereum Foundation’s role is changing after completing its early historical mission. Rather than remaining a single leading institution, it is becoming a node of institutional transition. The next-stage question for the Ethereum ecosystem is therefore how to carry out a smooth succession from the existing institutional arrangement to a new governance structure.
CIP Expiry, ETH Reserve Use and Core Development Funding
On funding, the article says Ethereum is approaching a structural funding gap. The pressures cited include the protocol incentive program CIP ending in 2026 and the Ethereum Foundation entering a contraction cycle after consuming its ETH reserves. Van Epps said these factors could bring long-term pressure that pushes core development funding down to roughly the $30 million level.
The analysis also states that, without a sustained funding mechanism, core development teams and infrastructure capacity face the risk of attrition. That would affect the network’s long-term reliability and create what the article describes as an “unfunded protocol burden.” In this view, Ethereum’s institutional succession is not only about organizational roles, but also about how funding sources, governance legitimacy and long-term protocol maintenance are rearranged.