Staking-as-a-Business: A Complete Guide for Custodians, Exchanges, Wallets, and Banks

<h2 id="series-legal-layer"><strong>Series: Legal Layer</strong></h2><p>Legal Layer is <a href="http://p2p.org/?ref=p2p.org">P2P.org</a>'s monthly regulatory intelligence series for custodians, ETF issuers, treasury teams, staking product managers, and validator risk committees navigating the intersection of institutional finance, proof-of-stake infrastructure, and on-chain capital markets. Each edition covers the regulatory developments, legislative updates, and policy signals that matter most for institutions building or evaluating staking and DeFi strategies.</p><p>Previously in the series: <a href="https://p2p.org/economy/legal-layer-institutional-staking-defi-regulatory-update-august-2026/">Legal Layer: Institutional Staking &amp; DeFi Regulatory Update — August 2026</a></p><hr><h2 id="quick-learnings-for-busy-readers">Quick Learnings for Busy Readers</h2><p>Short on time? Here are the key takeaways. For the full analysis, continue reading below.</p><ul><li>The CLARITY Act failed its September 15 cloture vote 49 to 50, falling eleven votes short of the 60 needed to open Senate floor debate. The bill is effectively dead for 2026. The legal classification of staking as a non-securities activity under the March 17 SEC-CFTC joint interpretation remains reversible administrative guidance rather than statute for at least two more years.</li><li>The SEC published Regulation Crypto Assets on August 18, 2026, its first standalone offering framework for crypto assets, with a public comment period running until October 20. The proposed rules build on the March 2026 joint interpretation and establish two registration exemptions tailored to investment contracts involving crypto assets.</li><li>The OCC's November target for final GENIUS Act stablecoin rules remains on track, with Comptroller Gould stating the agency expects to begin processing stablecoin issuer applications in 2027. The 120-day clock between final rules and GENIUS Act effectiveness means compliance obligations could begin as early as March 2027 if the November target holds.</li><li>The Monetary Authority of Singapore proposed amendments to the Payment Services Act on September 1 to formally codify its stablecoin framework into statute, with a consultation period running until October 16. The proposal includes a prohibition on paying yield to holders of MAS-regulated stablecoins, directly parallel to the GENIUS Act's no-yield provision.</li><li>Binance withdrew its MiCA license application in Greece in June 2026 and paused crypto services to EU customers pending relicensing, according to Wikipedia's MiCA article citing ESMA's April 2026 enforcement statement, confirming that the enforcement gap documented in August is closing as major platforms make formal decisions about EU market participation.</li></ul><div class="kg-card kg-callout-card kg-callout-card-blue"><div class="kg-callout-emoji">🗞️</div><div class="kg-callout-text"><b><strong style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Subscribe to our newsletter</strong></b> at the bottom of this page to receive a monthly summary of the latest staking and DeFi regulatory developments, curated for institutional participants.</div></div><h2 id="what-does-september-2026s-regulation-news-mean-for-institutions-building-staking-and-defi-programs">What does September 2026's regulation news mean for institutions building staking and DeFi programs?</h2><p>The CLARITY Act's failure at the September 15 cloture vote closes the 2026 statutory path for staking's legal classification, leaving institutional compliance programs operating against reversible administrative guidance for at least two more years. The SEC responded the same day by reaffirming it will deliver for investors and innovators with or without the legislation, pointing to Regulation Crypto Assets as the operative framework through its comment period. The OCC is racing to finalize GENIUS Act stablecoin rules by November, a timeline that compresses institutional preparation to months. And Singapore has launched a stablecoin consultation that includes the same no-yield prohibition as the GENIUS Act, confirming that the constraint on stablecoin yield as an institutional return mechanism is hardening across multiple major jurisdictions simultaneously, reinforcing staking's structural advantage as the primary compliant on-chain yield mechanism.</p><h2 id="1-clarity-act-fails-senate-cloture-49-to-50-effectively-dead-for-2026"><strong>1. CLARITY Act Fails Senate Cloture 49 to 50, Effectively Dead for 2026</strong></h2><p>The U.S. Senate voted 49 to 50 on the motion to invoke cloture on the CLARITY Act at 2:15 PM ET on September 15, 2026, falling eleven votes short of the 60 required to open floor debate. One senator did not vote. The result is unambiguous: the bill does not advance to floor debate, is not subject to further amendment, and cannot be signed into law in 2026. The vote did not fail over the market structure framework itself. It failed on political disputes that were never resolved: ethics provisions addressing government officials' ties to the crypto industry, illicit finance provisions under Section 604, stablecoin yield language, and the reconciliation between the Senate Banking Committee and Senate Agriculture Committee versions.</p><p>SEC Chairman Paul Atkins said the agency will deliver for investors and innovators with or without the legislation, pointing to Regulation Crypto Assets as the operative framework. The White House Council of Economic Advisers posted an updated FAQ on September 15 restating that an effective ban on stablecoin yield would have little effect on bank lending. The fall Senate calendar is now dominated by election-year politics and must-pass spending bills, making floor time for a complex, contested crypto bill unavailable. The next realistic legislative window is 2027 at the earliest, following the November midterms.</p><p>Source: <a href="https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2026/09/15/crypto-clarity-act-flames-out-in-failed-u-s-senate-vote?ref=p2p.org">CoinDesk</a>, <a href="https://homecryptoinvest.com/news/clarity-act-senate-vote-result.html?ref=p2p.org">HomeCryptoInvest</a>, <a href="https://www.cryptotimes.io/2026/09/15/senate-tests-clarity-act-at-215-p-m-et-what-todays-cloture-vote-can-change-and-what-it-cannot/?ref=p2p.org">CryptoTimes</a>, September 2026.</p><h3 id="why-is-this-relevant-for-validators-and-the-staking-ecosystem"><strong>Why is this relevant for validators and the staking ecosystem?</strong></h3><ul><li>The March 17 SEC-CFTC joint interpretation classifying protocol staking as a non-securities activity across all four operational models remains in effect as the operative compliance framework. What changes is that it is now confirmed as reversible administrative guidance for at least the remainder of this decade rather than a statute with binding and durable legal force.</li><li>Institutions that built compliance timelines and product roadmaps assuming 2026 CLARITY Act passage must now formally update their planning frameworks for a 2027 or later rulemaking scenario, with agency guidance rather than statute as the operative protection for the foreseeable future.</li><li>The SEC's immediate pivot to Regulation Crypto Assets as the operative framework signals that the agency intends to fill the statutory gap through rulemaking. Institutions should treat the October 20 comment deadline as a direct opportunity to shape how staking arrangements, DeFi vault deployments, and liquid staking token structures are addressed in the final rule.</li></ul><h2 id="2-sec-publishes-regulation-crypto-assets-on-august-18-comment-period-closes-october-20th"><strong>2. SEC Publishes Regulation Crypto Assets on August 18, Comment Period Closes October 20th</strong></h2><p>The SEC published Regulation Crypto Assets in the Federal Register on August 21, 2026, starting a 60-day comment clock that runs until October 20. The proposed rules, announced on August 18 under File Number S7-2026-27, are the SEC's first standalone offering framework for crypto assets and build directly on the March 2026 joint interpretation with the CFTC. The framework creates two registration exemptions tailored to investment contracts involving crypto assets: a one-time startup exemption permitting offerings of up to $5 million during a four-year period, and a second exemption for more established projects meeting defined disclosure and governance thresholds.</p><p>The proposal tracks the CLARITY Act's SEC-side framework, which addressed only the offering side of market structure and leaves trading, custody, and exchange regulation to separate rulemakings still on the SEC's 2026 agenda. Chairman Atkins described it on September 15 as a key element in advancing the rule books for the modern era and another step toward onshoring innovation in crypto asset markets. The proposal explicitly addresses how a non-security crypto asset may become subject to, and how it may cease to be subject to, an investment contract, the same question the CLARITY Act's decentralization threshold test addressed in legislative form.</p><p>Source: <a href="https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026-76-sec-proposes-new-regulation-crypto-assets?ref=p2p.org">SEC.gov</a>, <a href="https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/sec-proposes-regulation-crypto-assets-rulemaking?ref=p2p.org">White &amp; Case</a>, <a href="https://www.thompsoncoburn.com/insights/sec-proposes-new-rules-to-govern-the-issuance-and-sale-of-certain-crypto-assets/?ref=p2p.org">Thompson Coburn</a>, September 2026.</p><h3 id="why-is-this-relevant-for-validators-and-the-staking-ecosystem-1"><strong>Why is this relevant for validators and the staking ecosystem?</strong></h3><ul><li>Regulation Crypto Assets addressing how a non-security crypto asset may become subject to an investment contract is the operative legal test that determines whether proof-of-stake staking arrangements, liquid staking tokens, and DeFi vault strategies fall under SEC jurisdiction. The proposed rule's treatment of these questions will govern institutional compliance frameworks for staking programs until a final rule is adopted.</li><li>The October 20 comment deadline is the primary window for validator operators, staking infrastructure providers, custodians, and DeFi protocol operators to submit formal positions on how their activities should be classified under the proposed framework. Comments submitted before October 20 are part of the administrative record that the SEC must address before finalizing the rule.</li><li>The proposal explicitly leaves trading, custody, and exchange regulation to separate rulemakings, meaning the compliance landscape for institutional staking programs will continue evolving through multiple sequential rulemakings rather than being resolved in a single framework.</li></ul><h2 id="3-occ-november-final-rule-target-holds-as-genius-act-effective-date-approaches"><strong>3. OCC November Final Rule Target Holds as GENIUS Act Effective Date Approaches</strong></h2><p>OCC Comptroller Jonathan Gould confirmed at the Wyoming Blockchain Symposium that the OCC is targeting November 2026 for its final GENIUS Act stablecoin regulations, with the agency expecting to begin processing stablecoin issuer applications in 2027. The GENIUS Act becomes effective on the earlier of January 18, 2027, or 120 days after primary federal payment stablecoin regulators issue final implementing rules. An OCC November final rule triggers the 120-day clock, meaning GENIUS Act obligations could take effect as early as March 2027.</p><p>The OCC's 376-page proposed rule, published in February and open for public comment through May, covers permissible reserve assets, redemption at par, liquidity standards, risk management, audits, reporting, custody requirements, and orderly wind-down of failed issuers. Separate rulemakings from the Federal Reserve, FDIC, FinCEN, and Treasury address AML, BSA, and sanctions compliance. The Federal Reserve has not yet issued its final rule, one of several still outstanding across the six agencies required to act under the GENIUS Act.</p><p>Source: <a href="https://www.pymnts.com/legal/2026/occ-races-the-clock-to-finish-genius-act-stablecoin-rules/?ref=p2p.org">PYMNTS</a>, <a href="https://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/bulletins/2026/bulletin-2026-3.html?ref=p2p.org">OCC</a>, September 2026.</p><h3 id="why-is-this-relevant-for-validators-and-the-staking-ecosystem-2"><strong>Why is this relevant for validators and the staking ecosystem?</strong></h3><ul><li>An OCC November final rule triggering a March 2027 effective date compresses institutional preparation to four months rather than the full runway the January 2027 statutory deadline implied. Institutions that have not yet completed GENIUS Act compliance planning should treat November as the operative planning deadline rather than January.</li><li>The no-yield prohibition on payment stablecoins, once final, structurally redirects institutional demand for on-chain returns toward staking yield as the primary compliant mechanism. The earlier the effective date arrives, the sooner that demand shift materializes in the validator infrastructure market.</li><li>OCC custody standards for payment stablecoin reserves require segregation, key control, and defined redemption mechanics that directly affect how bank-affiliated custodians structure staking arrangements where stablecoin reserves intersect with proof-of-stake validator infrastructure.</li></ul><h2 id="4-singapore-mas-proposes-stablecoin-framework-amendments-with-no-yield-prohibition-consultation-closes-october-16th"><strong>4. Singapore MAS Proposes Stablecoin Framework Amendments With No-Yield Prohibition, Consultation Closes October 16th</strong></h2><p>The Monetary Authority of Singapore published a consultation paper on September 1 proposing amendments to the Payment Services Act 2019 that would formally codify its stablecoin framework into statute for the first time. The proposal targets single-currency stablecoins pegged to the Singapore dollar or a G10 currency, establishing stablecoin issuance as a distinct regulated payment service under the Payment Services Act. The consultation is open until October 16, 2026. MAS has granted 38 Major Payment Institution licences for digital payment token services as of September 2026, with licensed platforms including Coinbase, OKX Singapore, Bitstamp, and Revolut, though many serve only institutional or accredited investors.</p><p>The MAS proposal includes a prohibition on paying yield to holders of MAS-regulated stablecoins, directly parallel to the GENIUS Act's no-yield provision and MiCA's treatment of e-money tokens. Full reserve backing and redemption at par are required, as they are under the GENIUS Act and MiCA. Singapore's framework is explicitly designed to align with G10 norms and includes a mechanism for recognizing comparable foreign stablecoins, which could affect which tokens reach the region's institutional demand. As of 2026, retail staking is banned for the general public in Singapore, with MAS determining it is too opaque and risky for non-institutional investors.</p><p>Source: <a href="https://www.trmlabs.com/resources/blog/singapores-proposed-stablecoin-rules-what-the-mas-consultation-means-for-issuers-exchanges-and-banks?ref=p2p.org">TRM Labs</a>, <a href="https://www.financexmagazine.com/post/singapore-stablecoin-regulation-gains-legal-teeth-under-mas-plan?ref=p2p.org">FinanceX Magazine</a>, <a href="https://blockchain.news/news/singapore-stablecoin-regulation-mas-framework?ref=p2p.org">Blockchain.News</a>, September 2026.</p><h3 id="why-is-this-relevant-for-validators-and-the-staking-ecosystem-3"><strong>Why is this relevant for validators and the staking ecosystem?</strong></h3><ul><li>Singapore's no-yield prohibition on MAS-regulated stablecoins, aligned with the GENIUS Act and MiCA, confirms that the constraint on stablecoin yield as an institutional return mechanism is hardening across three major jurisdictions simultaneously. As compliant stablecoins are prohibited from paying yield in the U.S., EU, and Singapore, staking becomes the structurally preferred mechanism for institutional on-chain returns across all three markets.</li><li>MAS's retail staking ban, in place since 2026, means that institutional staking infrastructure providers serving Singapore must operate exclusively within the accredited and institutional investor framework. Any product or marketing that inadvertently reaches retail participants creates direct regulatory exposure under Singapore's Payment Services Act.</li><li>The October 16 consultation deadline gives institutions with Singapore operations a direct window to shape how stablecoin reserve requirements intersect with institutional staking and DeFi vault strategies that use stablecoin collateral.</li></ul><h2 id="5-mica-enforcement-deepens-as-binance-withdraws-eu-license-application-and-major-platforms-formalize-market-decisions"><strong>5. MiCA Enforcement Deepens as Binance Withdraws EU License Application and Major Platforms Formalize Market Decisions</strong></h2><p>Binance withdrew its MiCA license application in Greece on June 24, 2026, and halted new services including spot trading, deposits, staking, and sign-ups for EU customers from July 1, while continuing to allow fund withdrawals, pending relicensing through another EU member state. The withdrawal confirms that the enforcement gap documented in August is closing as major platforms make formal decisions about EU market participation rather than continuing to operate in an ambiguous status. The ESMA register of authorized MiCA CASPs lists 324 firms as of August 2026, with enforcement intensity expected to increase through Q4 2026 as national competent authorities complete their initial application reviews.</p><p>The convergence of MiCA enforcement, the GENIUS Act implementation timeline, and Singapore's Payment Services Act consultation in the same quarter is not coincidental. All three frameworks share the same design principles: full reserve backing, redemption at par, no yield to holders, and licensed-only issuance. The global regulatory template for institutional stablecoin infrastructure is consolidating around these requirements across the three largest institutional capital markets outside China.</p><p>Source: <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/binance-withdraws-mica-license-application-173752458.html?ref=p2p.org">Yahoo Finance via Decrypt</a>, <a href="https://www.euronews.com/business/2026/06/25/binance-to-halt-crypto-services-across-eu-countries-after-failing-to-secure-mica-approval?ref=p2p.org">Euronews</a>, June 2026.</p><h3 id="why-is-this-relevant-for-validators-and-the-staking-ecosystem-4"><strong>Why is this relevant for validators and the staking ecosystem?</strong></h3><ul><li>Binance halting new services for EU customers from July 1 while pursuing relicensing elsewhere signals that MiCA enforcement is producing the market restructuring it was designed to achieve. The window for major platforms to operate outside the ESMA CASP register is closing.</li><li>The convergence of MiCA, GENIUS Act, and MAS frameworks around identical no-yield stablecoin design principles across three major jurisdictions confirms that staking is structurally positioned as the primary compliant on-chain yield mechanism in the world's three largest institutional digital asset markets, a demand driver that is regulatory-framework-driven rather than market-cycle-driven.</li><li>For institutional staking programs with EU, U.S., and Singapore exposure, the simultaneous tightening of stablecoin yield restrictions across all three jurisdictions strengthens the compliance case for proof-of-stake network participation as the yield source of choice within regulated institutional mandates.</li></ul><div class="kg-card kg-callout-card kg-callout-card-blue"><div class="kg-callout-emoji">🗞️</div><div class="kg-callout-text"><b><strong style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Subscribe to our newsletter</strong></b> at the bottom of this page to receive a monthly summary of the latest staking and DeFi regulatory developments, curated for institutional participants.</div></div><h2 id="frequently-asked-questions-faqs"><strong>Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)</strong></h2><h3 id="what-does-the-clarity-acts-failure-mean-for-institutions-with-active-staking-programs"><strong>What does the CLARITY Act's failure mean for institutions with active staking programs?</strong></h3><p>Existing staking programs are not affected. The March 17 SEC-CFTC joint interpretation classifying protocol staking as a non-securities activity remains operative. What changes is that the interpretation is now confirmed as reversible administrative guidance for at least the remainder of this decade rather than a statute. Institutions with active staking programs should document their reliance on the March 17 interpretation explicitly in their compliance frameworks and build contingency plans for a scenario in which the interpretation is revised before a statutory replacement is enacted.</p><h3 id="what-is-regulation-crypto-assets-and-how-does-it-differ-from-the-clarity-act"><strong>What is Regulation Crypto Assets and how does it differ from the CLARITY Act?</strong></h3><p>Regulation Crypto Assets is the SEC's proposed rulemaking framework for how investment contracts involving crypto assets can be offered and sold. It addresses only the offering side of market structure, leaving trading, custody, and exchange regulation to separate rulemakings. The CLARITY Act was a comprehensive statutory framework that would have divided regulatory jurisdiction between the SEC and CFTC across all market functions and made those divisions binding law. Regulation Crypto Assets operates within the SEC's existing statutory authority and can be reversed or revised by a future administration without Congressional action, the same vulnerability that the CLARITY Act would have addressed.</p><h3 id="what-does-the-simultaneous-no-yield-prohibition-across-mica-the-genius-act-and-mas-frameworks-mean-for-institutional-defi-strategies"><strong>What does the simultaneous no-yield prohibition across MiCA, the GENIUS Act, and MAS frameworks mean for institutional DeFi strategies?</strong></h3><p>As compliant stablecoins are prohibited from paying direct yield to holders across the U.S., EU, and Singapore simultaneously, institutions operating within regulated mandates in those jurisdictions face a structural constraint on stablecoin-based yield strategies. The practical effect is that proof-of-stake staking becomes the primary yield-bearing mechanism available within compliant institutional frameworks across all three markets. Institutions building DeFi vault strategies that rely on stablecoin yield should model the post-GENIUS Act and post-MAS framework environment as their primary planning scenario rather than treating current stablecoin yield arrangements as durable.</p><h3 id="what-should-institutions-do-now-that-the-clarity-act-has-failed"><strong>What should institutions do now that the CLARITY Act has failed?</strong></h3><p>Three immediate actions matter. First, update compliance frameworks to reflect that the March 17 SEC-CFTC joint interpretation is the operative framework for staking classification, document the reliance explicitly, and build contingency plans for its potential revision. Second, submit a comment letter on Regulation Crypto Assets before October 20, focusing specifically on how staking arrangements, liquid staking tokens, and DeFi vault strategies should be classified under the proposed offering framework. Third, begin GENIUS Act compliance preparation in earnest, treating November as the operative OCC final rule deadline rather than January, and model March 2027 as the likely effective date.</p><h3 id="what-does-singapores-retail-staking-ban-mean-for-institutional-staking-product-design"><strong>What does Singapore's retail staking ban mean for institutional staking product design?</strong></h3><p>Singapore's MAS ban on retail staking means that any institutional staking product targeting Singapore participants must be structured exclusively for accredited and institutional investors from the outset. Products that mix retail and institutional access create direct regulatory exposure. For staking infrastructure providers building Singapore-facing products, the accredited investor threshold is the operational boundary that determines which distribution channels, marketing materials, and client onboarding processes are permissible under MAS's Payment Services Act framework.</p><hr><p><strong>About P2P.org</strong></p><p>Founded in 2018, P2P.org helps institutional capital protect Digital Asset Yield across non-custodial staking infrastructure and curated DeFi strategies. With over $10B in assets secured and operating on 35+ proof-of-stake networks, P2P.org maintains a zero-slashing incident track record, is trusted by over 190 institutional clients and is SOC 2 Type II attested and ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certified. To explore how P2P.org can support your institution's staking or DeFi infrastructure needs, <a href="https://p2p.org/contact?ref=p2p.org">get in touch with our team</a>.</p><hr><p><strong>Disclaimer</strong></p><p>This material is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment, financial, legal, or tax advice. <a href="http://p2p.org/?ref=p2p.org">P2P.org</a> accepts no liability for any actions taken based on it. Latency and performance figures referenced are estimates based on internal benchmarks and may vary depending on network conditions, geography, and client infrastructure. Past performance is not indicative of future results.</p>

<p>Each month, we publish a full breakdown of how our Solana validators performed against the rest of the field: gross rewards, MEV capture, and reliability, all sourced from our own on-chain data collectors and reproducible from raw epoch data. Here's how we performed in August, covering epochs 1010 to 1025. </p><p><strong>The headline</strong></p><p>Almost every Solana validator earns close to the same base reward. Issuance, the protocol-set portion of staking rewards, is identical for any correctly run validator. What actually separates operators is what they capture on top of that base: MEV and reliability.</p><p>In August, P2P.org's Total Gross APY came in at 6.16%, just ahead of the next-best validator we track at 6.11%. The gap is small because most of that return is the same base reward every validator earns. </p><figure class="kg-card kg-image-card"><img src="https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/2026/09/1600x900--47-.png" class="kg-image" alt="Bar chart comparing P2P.org's 6.16% Total Gross APY against the next-best peer validator's 6.11% for August 2026." loading="lazy" width="1600" height="900" srcset="https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/size/w600/2026/09/1600x900--47-.png 600w, https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/size/w1000/2026/09/1600x900--47-.png 1000w, https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/2026/09/1600x900--47-.png 1600w" sizes="(min-width: 720px) 720px"></figure><p><strong>Where the edge comes from</strong></p><p>MEV capture: P2P.org's Jito tips rate ran at 0.39%, against a 0.26% simple network average. That's the one part of the reward validators actually compete on: tip volume carries a real element of market luck, but capturing it consistently comes down to validator-client configuration, MEV-strategy setup, and being present for every assigned slot.</p><figure class="kg-card kg-image-card"><img src="https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/2026/09/1600x900--44--2.png" class="kg-image" alt="Bar chart comparing P2P.org's 0.39% Jito tips APY against a 0.26% simple network average for August 2026." loading="lazy" width="1600" height="900" srcset="https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/size/w600/2026/09/1600x900--44--2.png 600w, https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/size/w1000/2026/09/1600x900--44--2.png 1000w, https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/2026/09/1600x900--44--2.png 1600w" sizes="(min-width: 720px) 720px"></figure><p>Reliability: Across vote success, block production, and uptime, P2P.org ran ahead of the network average for validators with 100k+ SOL staked, on every metric, in August:</p><figure class="kg-card kg-image-card"><img src="https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/2026/09/1600x900--45-.png" class="kg-image" alt="Table comparing P2P.org against network average across three reliability metrics for August 2026: vote success at 99.8% versus 99.0%, block production at 100.0% versus 99.5%, and uptime at 100.0% versus 99.4%." loading="lazy" width="1600" height="900" srcset="https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/size/w600/2026/09/1600x900--45-.png 600w, https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/size/w1000/2026/09/1600x900--45-.png 1000w, https://p2p.org/economy/content/images/2026/09/1600x900--45-.png 1600w" sizes="(min-width: 720px) 720px"></figure><p><strong>Why this matters going forward</strong></p><p>Solana's SGP-0002 vote, passed in August, doubles the pace at which the issuance (base reward) component declines over the next three years. As that shared portion shrinks, MEV and reliability make up more of what a validator actually earns, and more of what separates one from another.</p><p>The full breakdown, including the reward-composition chart, the full peer comparison, and our methodology, is available here: </p><h3 id="read-the-august-2026-solana-staking-snapshot"><a href="https://2e4kdb.share-eu1.hsforms.com/2vrb-vR6VRtCUQrjQA6mhjg?ref=p2p.org"><strong>Read the August 2026 Solana Staking Snapshot</strong></a><br></h3><p>If you're staking on Solana, or considering it, reach out to your account manager or visit p2p.org to get started.<br></p><div class="kg-card kg-toggle-card" data-kg-toggle-state="close"> <div class="kg-toggle-heading"> <h4 class="kg-toggle-heading-text"><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">FAQ</span></h4> <button class="kg-toggle-card-icon" aria-label="Expand toggle to read content"> <svg id="Regular" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path class="cls-1" d="M23.25,7.311,12.53,18.03a.749.749,0,0,1-1.06,0L.75,7.311"></path> </svg> </button> </div> <div class="kg-toggle-content"><p dir="ltr"><b><strong style="white-space: pre-wrap;">What is Total Gross APY?</strong></b><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"> It's the combined annualized rate from all three Solana validator reward types: staking (issuance), Jito tips, and block rewards, before any commission is deducted.</span></p><p dir="ltr"><b><strong style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Why does P2P.org report a different APY than sites like Staking Rewards?</strong></b><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"> A few reasons: whether compounding is included (APY vs. APR), whether commission is deducted (gross vs. net), which reward types are counted, and how the averaging window is defined. None of these methodologies is wrong; they're just measuring different things. We publish our full methodology alongside the raw data on our dashboard.</span></p><p dir="ltr"><b><strong style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Is this the APY I'd actually earn if I staked with P2P.org?</strong></b><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"> This report shows gross rewards, before commission. Your actual net rewards depend on P2P.org's fee and your specific delegation. Contact your account manager for the exact numbers.</span></p><p dir="ltr"><b><strong style="white-space: pre-wrap;">How often is this published? </strong></b><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Monthly, covering the prior month's epochs.</span></p><p dir="ltr"><b><strong style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Can I check these numbers myself?</strong></b><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"> Yes. All the raw epoch-level data behind this report is exportable from our public dashboard at </span><a href="http://reports.p2p.org/superset/dashboard/p/WMGBkJ8LvPz/?ref=p2p.org"><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">reports.p2p.org</span></a><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">, along with the calculation methodology.</span></p></div> </div><p><strong>Disclaimer</strong></p><p><em>This material is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment, financial, legal, or tax advice. </em><a href="http://p2p.org/?ref=p2p.org"><em>P2P.org</em></a><em> accepts no liability for any actions taken based on it. Latency and performance figures referenced are estimates based on internal benchmarks and may vary depending on network conditions, geography, and client infrastructure. Past performance is not indicative of future results.</em></p>