- TRON’s latest proposal only allows full SELFDESTRUCT deletion for contracts created and eliminated within the same transaction.
- It would keep contracts intact beyond the destruction of the same transactions and transfer balances to a target address.
TRON has proposed to activate TIP-6780 on its main network the SELFDESTRUCT behavior of the network in accordance with Ethereum’s EIP-6780. TIP-6780 will apply changes already included in GreatVoyage v4.8.1 at the protocol level, if approved.
Listed as Proposition 94, it limits the complete deletion of contracts to cases where a contract is created and destroyed within the same transaction. In all other cases, the contract would remain onchain while the assets would move to the destination address. The update will also set the opcode’s fixed energy cost to 5,000.
A new discussion has been opened about enabling a v4.8.1 feature to tune SELFDESTRUCT behavior on Ethereum EIP-6780.
Main changes:
Deletion is only allowed in the same transaction as creating the contract
Otherwise the contract remains in existence, only the balance is transferred
Energy costs set… pic.twitter.com/GioeR7bLjf— TRON DAO (@trondao) March 13, 2026
TRON linked the proposal to the previous depreciation trajectory for SELFDESTRUCT, as set out in TIP-652. The new plan goes further in that direction, while remaining more closely compatible Ethereum.
According to the proposal, the change preserves the common pattern where a contract is created in a single transaction and self-destructs. That pattern accounts for nearly all of the observed SELFDESTRUCT-related internal transactions in TRON’s 2025 data sample. The network says that 957,316 of 957,324 such transactions followed the same transaction pattern.
This week, TRON DAO joined the Linux Foundation’s Agentic AI Foundation as a gold member and took a seat on its board of directors. We reported that Circle and JPMorgan are also part of the group.
TRON’s proposal aims for limited contract removal
Under the proposed rules, when SELFDESTRUCT is outside of the transaction that created the contract, the current execution frame would immediately stop. However, the contract code, storage and account remain in place. The assets of the account, including $TRXdeployed $TRXand TRC10 tokens would be transferred to the chosen destination address instead.
In such cases, if the beneficiary is the contract itself, the assets would not be burned and there would be no net change in the balance. In contrast, if SELFDESTRUCT occurs in the same transaction as contract creation, the behavior remains as before, including deleting account information and transferring balances.
The proposal said that a contract would only count as newly created if the implementation succeeds via CREATE, CREATE2 or a similar method within the same transaction. TRON’s account activation rules remain the same under this change.
Contracts that rely on redeployment to the same address via CREATE2 after SELFDESTRUCT would no longer work as intended unless destruction occurs in the same transaction as creation. Furthermore, patterns that rely on SELFDESTRUCT for account deletions or asset burning will also change beyond that limited case.
TRON’s published onchain analysis showed limited exposure to ecosystems. Few contracts contained the SELFDESTRUCT opcode, fewer hold assets, and none in the group reviewed executed an actual SELFDESTRUCT transaction.
Formerly CNF outlined TRON’s AI push as the network introduced the onchain Bank of AI through AINFT. The system allows autonomous agents to make payments, manage assets, and access DeFi with x402 payments and 8004 identities.