Opinion by: Barna Kiss, CEO of Malda
An idea recently floating some well-known thinking in the Ethereum space to regain the value for mainnet is the taxation of its layer-2s. The future of Ethereum does not depend on the policy but in enabling the movement of capital without friction between the L2s in question. Tariffing rollups can appear a harmonious way to recover the value for mainnet. In practice, it will fragment the ecosystem, drain, push users toward centralized platforms, and prevent decentralized finances as a whole. In an unauthorized system, the capital flows to where it is treated best, and the Ethereum rollups make it wrong.
Destruction of liquidity is Ethereum’s real threat
In traditional finances, the link between fluid and growth has been properly established. Lower barriers to capital streams lead to increased investment. Get the pre-brexit single market of the European Union. The investment flow slows down when the exit of the United Kingdom framed access to capital pools, as noted by economists monitor cross-border activity. Ethereum is faced with a decentralized Parallel.
Rollups, especially those who are optimistic and based on ZK, impose delays for up to a week with retreat and only offer patchy cross-rollup liquidity. The result is a fragment system in which the adoption slows down, and the capital is not used.
The developers were left with two poor choices. Either they focus on a rollup and limit their audience, or fragment liquidity to many and receive efficiency. Either choice serves the long -term interest of the ecosystem. A significant opportunity lies, therefore, with protocols that remove these frictions. They will be more attractive capitalwork better, and deliver better experiences.
Recently: 3 Reason Ethereum can turn to a corner
Capital movement should be abstract away from the end-user. Bridges and removal of queues should be concerns at the protocol level, not user problems. It is possible for liquidity to deploy to one rollup to satisfy demand to another, with a background balancing re -balancing solvency and efficiency. What seems complicated can be made that are invisible.
The transfer of this design from reactive bridging to the coordination of liquid -based liquid will restore composability and maintain decentralization. More importantly, it will promote the basic principles of Ethereum of the development of open systems without central gatekeepers. Without it, users will continue to rely on centralized exchanges to miss friction, compromising self-custody for comfort. It’s not just a technical challenge – it’s a philosophical.
Designing around friction is the competitive edge
Designing around capital efficiency becomes a competitive edge. Defi protocols tomorrow will not only compete with fees or yields. They will compete with how well they can access liquidity in a fractured scene. The winners are the ones who can fulfill a user’s request for which the user does not ask them to move the funds. The result will be better UX, more productive capital, and higher network stickiness.
Some underlying technology begins to address the problem. The Ethereum-native rollup, planned after a hard fork in 2026, promises a closer integration, and while they are still not prepared for deployment, the based rollups offer tighter alignment with Ethereum by sharing the order and improving the formation while sacrificing some freedom. Meanwhile, optimistic rollups are racing to implement zero-knowledge proofs to speed up the release. These innovations reduce friction, but they are not sufficient on themselves. The scale will come from applications designed around these barriers, not from the base layers only.
ZK-Rollups are particularly suitable for this. Their cryptographic structure allows for low-lattency and trust-minimized messaging between chains. This makes it ideal for applications such as payments, decentralized trading, and real-time financial products, all of which demand speed and certainty. If Ethereum can make such a cross-rollup flow without seam, it is not just size. It will be a spine of a better financial system.
That outcome is not guaranteed. Rollup tariffs can deliver short -term goals, but in the long run, they can weaken the network itself aimed at strengthening Ethereum. For example, Solana offers composability within a single domain. While Ethereum’s modular approach may be more stable, it cannot ignore the cost of destruction.
The greatest strength of Ethereum is its neutrality. That should include the ability of capital to move freely within its ecosystem. The future will not be built by taxing rollups. It will be built by enabling them to work as an economic machine.
Opinion by: Barna Kiss, CEO of Malda.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be done as legal or investment advice. The views, attitudes, and opinions expressed here are unique and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of the cointelegraph.
