On May 5, 344,780 COMP tokens delegated to the Compound Foundation lifted the supporting side of a $52 million V4 budget vote from 45.1% to 50.1% of voting power at the snapshot, according to a Bitquery analysis of on-chain records — the same tokens at the center of an alleged misuse of 8.42 million DAI in the lending protocol's V2 reserves.

The Compound Foundation on Sept. 28 rejected governance participant Ugur Mersin's Sept. 27 allegation that it had appropriated DAO-owned reserves to bankroll governance outcomes benefiting itself. The Foundation said the assets remain DAO-owned and have not funded Foundation operations.

"They have been used to support protocol operations and governance continuity," the Foundation wrote in its Sept. 28 statement on the community forum. "The assets remain DAO-owned, and none have been spent on Foundation operations."

What Reserve Mandate Did Proposal 536 Set?

Proposal 536, executed on Feb. 19, transferred 8.42 million DAI to a designated multisig following V2's wind-down. The mandate permitted support for protocol operations and governance continuity, including maintaining COMP availability. It excluded discretionary trading and Foundation-specific expenses.

Mersin's forum post alleged that reserve funds were sent to an exchange, returned as 344,780 COMP, and delegated to the Foundation's voting address. He alleged the Foundation used those tokens without authorization to approve treasury changes and a $52 million V4 program.

The on-chain record confirms both the voting-power shift and the votes that followed. A vote receipt from May 5 shows the Foundation casting about 912,717 COMP in favor of treasury-management Proposal 580 and V4 funding Proposal 582.

Did the V4 Vote Clear Quorum Without the Disputed Tokens?

The V4 vote's final tally was 1,883,966 COMP in favor from 25 voters, with none against or abstaining, against a 400,000-COMP quorum. Compound proposals pass when votes in favor exceed votes against and clear that quorum.

Bitquery counts 3,757,805 COMP delegated across 4,334 addresses at the snapshot block, putting the supporting side at 50.1% with the disputed tokens and 45.1% without them. The firm also identified 33 wallets holding 1,611,867 votes, tied to the trader known as Humpy, that did not cast a ballot — more than the 1,539,186 COMP the supporting side would have held had the disputed tokens been excluded.

That margin does not resolve Mersin's underlying objection: whether the Foundation had authority to deploy the reserve tokens as voting weight at all.

How Is the V4 Budget Structured?

The approved V4 budget designates $14 million for a Foundation-controlled operational wallet and $38 million for a program reserve subject to milestone-based release by a five-of-seven Treasury Management Committee multisig. The program finances Compound's push into institutional credit infrastructure.

The Foundation's statement did not itemize reserve-funded expenditures or payees. Proposal 536 requires retrospective quarterly reporting of treasury-management activity. The next such report, due at the close of the upcoming quarter, will determine whether the on-chain ledger corroborates the Foundation's stated use of reserves or fuels a continued governance challenge at the protocol's core lending venues.