Auto-Burn and BEP-95: when burn totals can be added
Independent burn flows can be added for the same period. Cumulative counters and totals that already include a component cannot.
- Auto-Burn
- Check the quarterly event amount
- BEP-95
- Use the period increase, not the lifetime counter
Combine only the same asset and period, without overlap.
On this page
The word “independent” causes two opposite mistakes. Some readers take it as permission to add any two figures. Others conclude the mechanisms must never be combined. The important question is what each figure contains.
Different inputs, different reporting rhythms
Auto-Burn uses quarterly calculation inputs that include price and relevant block production. It should not be casually rewritten as a purchase funded by centralized-exchange quarterly profits. The 36th-burn announcement also notes parameter adjustments following changes in block frequency. An old formula should not be combined uncritically with a newer network's block count.
BEP-95 describes burning a governed share of BSC gas fees collected by validators. Its original parameter setting is a historical design detail, not evidence that the same setting necessarily applied throughout any later interval. Protocol documentation about operation should also be separated from the proposal's hopes about economic value.
Both mechanisms can be measured in BNB. Matching units, however, do not establish matching periods. One number might describe a quarterly action and another everything accumulated since a mechanism started. Exchange-account trading fees and network gas fees should not be treated as one pool either; wallet gas and exchange deductions belong to different contexts.
A short test before inserting the plus sign
| Available figures | Treatment |
|---|---|
| Independent flows for one interval | Add after checking for overlap |
| Quarterly event and lifetime fee counter | Find the fee counter's period increment first |
| Published total and an included component | Do not append the component again |
| One transaction reported by two services | Count the event once |
Consider a hypothetical quarter with a 1,000-unit event and a fee counter rising from 200 to 230. If scope is unchanged and the events do not overlap, the fee increment is 30 and combined burns are 1,030. The answer is not 1,230. These are illustrative units, not actual BNB statistics.
Now suppose a report already states “1,030 total, including 30 from fees”. Adding 30 again is wrong even though the mechanisms remain independent. Words such as “including”, “cumulative” and “as of” tell you how the figures relate. Keep those words beside the extracted number.
Preserve interval boundaries. A source ending at announcement time is not automatically a complete calendar-quarter series. Adjacent periods also need a consistent treatment of the boundary event. Where parameters changed during an interval, actual records or appropriately separated subperiods are needed; applying the final ratio to all historical fees can misstate the result.
Deduplication needs more than matching addresses. One address can receive different kinds of transfers, and one source may show a total while another lists its components. Identify the event and record granularity before choosing which rows enter the calculation.
Combined burns and supply change still need reconciliation
A burn total equals the decline between supply snapshots only under further conditions: identical supply scope and boundaries, with no unaccounted issuance, other movements or methodological revisions. A market service's circulating figure can also change because wallet classifications changed.
Keep an event table and a supply-snapshot table separately. Compare them only after establishing comparability. A difference is an investigation item, not automatic evidence of fee burning or a faulty quarterly formula. The 36th-burn case deliberately preserves such a residual without assigning an unsupported cause.
If recorded burns exceed a net supply decline, do not immediately delete a burn row. Check duplication, timing, other permitted movements and scope. This is a general troubleshooting path, not an allegation that any particular asset experienced extra issuance.
Write a total that another person can reproduce
A useful record identifies the interval, the asset, each mechanism's flow, inclusion relationships and any remaining supply residual. If overlap has not been checked, say so. A larger number is not a better result when its components cannot be explained.
Beside each amount, save its start and end time, unit, source and whether it is cumulative or already included elsewhere. The reconciliation ledger provides a place for those details. Keep the source footnote with the number so you can check the same inclusion rule when updating the total.