Ethereum on the brink: former EF employee warns of 'funding crisis' in the coming months
The Ethereum ecosystem could find itself in a serious financial trap within the next three to nine months. Trent Van Epps, who worked at the Ethereum Foundation (EF) from May 2021 to April 2026, is sounding the alarm: a "slowly escalating funding crisis" is already knocking at the door. Over five years, he coordinated protocol development, oversaw grants through Protocol Guild, and conducted economic research — his words carry weight.
At the heart of the problem lies the EF's philosophy called Subtraction. In 2019, it sounded noble: the foundation should resist growth and value accumulation, redistributing resources to the broader ecosystem. However, as Van Epps notes, in practice, legitimacy still hinges on the EF — due to its brand, connection to Vitalik Buterin, control over media assets, and the fact that the foundation directly employs about 25% of active core protocol contributors.
Two key factors are putting pressure on funding:
- Treasury contraction. In June 2025, the EF announced a plan to reduce annual spending from 15% to 5% by 2030. This is a strict diet that is already limiting capabilities.
- End of the Client Incentive Program. The program, which funded client teams through staking for four years, ends in April 2026. No replacement is in sight, leaving the ecosystem without a key support mechanism.
According to Van Epps' estimates, Ethereum needs about $30 million annually to sustain the work of over 10 client teams, research, and coordination groups. But finding this money is becoming increasingly difficult. Without stable funding, the ecosystem risks losing critically important specialists, falling behind in scaling, and preparing for challenges such as quantum computing. The developer warns: within 12–18 months, the consequences will be irreversible and costly.
Van Epps proposes rethinking the social, political, and economic contracts within the ecosystem. His prescription includes recognizing the network's three interdependent resources (software, blockchain, coin), creating scalable and neutral funding mechanisms, and prioritizing widespread technology adoption.
My analysis: The situation resembles the classic dilemma of decentralization — how to maintain independence without losing efficiency. The EF tried to "subtract" itself from the equation, but it led to financial starvation. Without urgent reforms, Ethereum risks becoming a victim of its own ideology. The market should closely monitor developments: if client team funding collapses, it will impact the security of the entire network.