Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
Following
UNI Uniswap Governance Proposal: Proposed activation agreement fees for some v4 pools
The Uniswap Governance Layer is considering a proposal to plan activation agreement fees for a selected set of v4 pools. This is a directional adjustment to the pool economy model and will be initiated in the form of a temperature check before fully switching the protocol fee switch.
Uniswap votes on how it will change the selected v4 pool
This measure is currently only a governance temperature check and no actual changes have been made to the protocol. According to a post on the Uniswap Governance Forum, the proposal would require token holders to vote on whether to open agreement fees for certain v4 pools. The key point is that its scope is limited to selected v4 pools, not all pools in the protocol. This selective framework is the key to what distinguishes the proposal from a comprehensive, protocol-level fee switch.
Agreement fees are part of the transaction fees incurred in the pool, which are reallocated to the agreement itself rather than going entirely to the liquidity provider. Enabling agreement fees changes the way liquidity value is captured along the chain, shifting some value from the pool level to the agreement level. The proposal is being tracked on the Uniswap Foundation voting page.
Why Selective v4 Fees Are Important to Pool Design
Activating fees for only some pools is a more refined approach than uniformly switching across all v4 pools. It allows governance to test the fee capture mechanism in the right scenarios while avoiding changing the economic model of all pools at once. This change involves the true trade-off between agreement revenue and pool-level returns for liquidity providers and builders. Redirecting some fees to the agreement strengthens the revenue base for UNI holders, an argument that echoes previous discussions about fee and destruction proposals and the revenue-sharing plan proposed by Uniswap Labs.
Uniswap founder Hayden Adams has publicly expressed his views on this proposal. The fee issue also coincides with the stage of Uniswap's broader reorganization of the protocol's governance structure following the "Unification" governance reform.
If the temperature check passes, what will happen next?
Temperature check is an early and non-binding emotional signal. If advanced, the regular path will lead to a formal on-chain governance proposal, which token holders will need to approve before the relevant fees can officially take effect. Details worth noting next include: which specific pools will be affected, specific details of implementation, and whether formal proposals can pass a vote. These confirmations will determine whether optional v4 fees can move from the discussion stage to the implementation stage.
