Burn & value flow

A fixed share of enterprise usage fees (e.g., 30%) is programmatically used to buy & burn $ATRX, linking demand to supply reduction. Over time, fee-burn is targeted to offset releases, with a glidepath to net-neutral or deflationary dynamics as adoption scales. (Exact percentage is governed; quarterly reports disclose burn vs release.) 

Epoch emissions split (illustrative): 40% mobile contributors / 40% challengers-security / 20% treasury & programs, subject to governance. An example epoch at N active devices and M challengers is included in the appendix for sustainability math. 

This distribution ensures that a majority of tokens (40%) directly incentivize the network’s user base over time, aligning with our principle that network value is created by the community. The team’s share is significant enough to reward builders but is long-term locked to demonstrate commitment. Investor allocation is modest – enough to fund development but not so high as to dominate the supply. And a healthy chunk is reserved for future needs and to ensure liquidity at the outset. At launch, only roughly 20-25% of the tokens will be in circulation (from the small unlocked investor portion, initial market liquidity, etc.), with the rest releasing gradually. This slow-release model prevents an oversupply shock and helps maintain token value in the early phase when utility demand is still growing.

Emission Schedule & Inflation Control

To reward ongoing contributions beyond the genesis allocations, Authra mints new $ATRX tokens on a controlled schedule. We use a decaying emissions model, where the network mints a certain percentage of the remaining “rewards pool” each year, so that the absolute number minted decreases over time. For example, in year 1 the protocol might issue 20% of the Community Rewards pool, and each subsequent year the percentage of the remaining pool is slightly lower (creating a half-life style decay). In practice, this might result in an inflation rate of around ~8% of circulating supply in the first year, dropping to <3% annually by year 5. This is conceptually similar to Bitcoin’s halving (but smoother) or to some POS chains that reduce emissions over time. The rationale is to front-load rewards when the network needs to attract participants and grow, but then taper off inflation as the network matures and organic usage (and fee burns) sustain the economy.

contd.

Valuation-Aligned Guardrails & KPIs 

Emission Guardrails: Emissions follow a decaying schedule with governance-tunable epochs. If net fees (after burns) ≥ X% of market cap on a trailing 90-day basis, emissions ratchet down by up to Y% at the next epoch to prioritize scarcity. Conversely, if sequencer/challenger APY and contributor APY < floor bands, emissions can ratchet up within predefined caps. (Exact X/Y values to be set by governance pre-TGE.)

• Utility/Burn Targets: Publish quarterly “usage-to-burn” ratios and aim for fee-burn ≥ 25–50% of new issuance by end of Year 2, with a glidepath to net-neutral or deflationary by Year 3.

• Concentration Limits: Foundation-tracked caps on any single entity’s circulating ownership (e.g., 5%) enforced via vesting and program policy; unlocks linked to circulating supply and liquidity conditions.

• Adoption KPIs: Public dashboards track (i) active contributor devices, (ii) covered km²/road-km, (iii) enterprise ARR, (iv) average data-point cost vs legacy tools. Governance ties grant programs to KPI attainment.

These guardrails are non-price-targeting controls that protect network health while aligning supply with real utility—providing an investor-grade path to sustainable valuation.

Emissions are typically split among:

• Mobile Contributors: e.g. 30-40% of each block’s newly minted tokens go to the pool that pays users running the app.

• Validators: e.g. another 30-40% of emissions reward those running nodes and staking to secure the network.

• Treasury or Other Pools: e.g. 20-30% might be allocated to the treasury for long-term funding, or to specific initiatives (if guided by governance).

This split ensures we incentivize both the “supply side” (data providers and validators) and maintain a reserve for development. As the network’s fee revenue grows, those fees effectively offset the need for high inflation – eventually the goal is to reach a net neutral or deflationary state where the number of tokens burned from usage equals or exceeds the number of new tokens minted for rewards. Our models project that if adoption grows as expected, inflation can drop from ~8% in year 1 to ~2% by year 5, and enterprise fee burns by year 5 could cancel out around 1–2% worth of tokens annually, making net inflation near zero or even negative beyond that. This keeps the token supply in check long-term, rewarding early adopters as their token holdings represent a growing share of a limited supply as the network gains real usage.

Burn Mechanics and Value Flow: On the flip side of minting, we have token burning to link usage to value:

• Whenever enterprises or developers use Authra’s data, they pay in either $ATRX or fiat. If fiat, the Authra treasury will take a portion and purchase $ATRX from the open market to burn, simulating as if the client paid in tokens. For example, we might set that 30% of all revenue is used for buy-and-burn each quarter. This creates buy pressure and reduces supply as adoption increases.

• If demand on the network surges (many customers pulling data, etc.), token burn accelerates and can outpace new issuance, making the token deflationary (more tokens removed than created). This dynamic ties token value to real-world demand for Authra’s services instead of pure speculation.

• Additionally, if needed, governance could enact additional stability measures, such as a reserve fund that can buy back tokens in extreme cases to support the price (though this would be used sparingly, as ultimately we want the economics to be market-driven). The protocol avoids promises of unsustainable high yields; instead, it can adjust reward rates gradually via governance to keep validator and user incentives at a healthy level without causing runaway inflation .

Economic Alignment: Authra’s economic design creates dual value streams:

1. Enterprise Revenue (fiat) – from selling data access and services, which provides real cash flow to fund operations and buy/burn tokens.

2. Crypto Token Value – from network effects and demand for $ATRX (for staking, governance, speculation on network growth).

This model means Authra is not solely dependent on token price hype; it has fundamental support from paying customers, which is a major differentiator from many earlier crypto projects. In downturns, if crypto markets slump, we can lean more on enterprise revenue to keep the system running (in the extreme, we could even temporarily reward users in a stablecoin or fiat if necessary to maintain engagement, although that’s a contingency). Conversely, if the network is booming in usage, token demand will naturally rise (more need for staking, more burns happening, etc.), potentially driving up value and attracting more participants – a positive feedback loop.

In summary, $ATRX is the lifeblood of Authra’s decentralized economy. Its mint-and-burn flow ensures those who contribute value are compensated, and those who derive value feed some back into the system. By carefully balancing distribution, controlling inflation, and tying token mechanics to real usage, Authra’s tokenomics seek to create a virtuous cycle of growth rather than a speculative boom-bust. As network demand grows, token utility and scarcity grow in tandem – making $ATRX a true representation of the network’s success .