
A controversial Bitcoin discussion is back in focus.
Peter Todd has argued that Bitcoin could eventually consider tail emissions — a small, permanent block reward to keep miners incentivized after the current subsidy becomes extremely small.
The argument: → Lost BTC may offset some new issuance
→ Miners need sustainable incentives
→ Transaction fees alone may not guarantee future security
→ Small emissions could provide long-term network support
But there’s a major problem:
The 21M cap is part of Bitcoin’s core monetary promise.
Removing it could change how investors view Bitcoin’s scarcity and monetary policy.
So the long-term question becomes:
🔒 21M hard cap vs. ♾️ Sustainable tail emissions
This is not an immediate proposal or protocol change. It’s a debate about how Bitcoin keeps itself secure in the distant future.
