ZetaChain Votes to Migrate ZETA to Solana and Shut Its L1

By Elena Vasquez

More than 99.99% of the voting power cast supported ZetaChain's plan to shut its native layer-1 around December 9 and move the native $ZETA token to Solana, according to the proposal record on the ZetaHub governance portal. The result supplies the authorization the team had made a prerequisite for moving the token.

Voting closed at 01:12 Japan time on November 8, and the development team confirmed the result the same day in a post on ZetaChain's official X account. The portal recorded 83% turnout, leaving 17% of eligible power outside participation despite the near-unanimous result. The governance mandate is clear; implementation now depends on the shutdown and exchange mechanics.

What does the approval authorize?

The approved measure carries two labels: Proposal 70 in the ZetaHub record and Governance Proposal 2 in the November 4 publication on ZetaChain's official blog. It schedules the native L1 shutdown for approximately December 9 and provides for a 1:1 exchange of $ZETA held on that chain for a Solana-based token.

For a holder of 100 $ZETA, the stated terms imply 100 units of the Solana-based token. The cited material does not specify a final claims deadline, wallet-provider steps, failed-transfer treatment, or whether users must move assets before shutdown. The approval settles the destination and ratio, but not every execution detail.

Why did ZetaChain choose Solana?

The development team said running an independent blockchain no longer helps its AI-service development. It selected Solana because the user base, PayFi rails and AI-agent infrastructure required by those services already operate there. Those are the team's stated reasons; the governance record cited here does not independently test their scale or performance.

That rationale would allow ZetaChain to use an established chain instead of maintaining its own layer-1. Operationally, ZetaChain will stop serving as the native settlement venue for $ZETA after the shutdown, while the token moves to Solana.

The record does not say whether the project's broader cross-chain services or bridge products continue after December 9. Moving the token removes the team's stated justification for operating a standalone chain, but the proposal leaves the post-migration service perimeter unclear.

Why did the project stage the migration in two votes?

ZetaChain first approved the basic policy in Proposal 68 on September 20, with 99.44% approval. That vote authorized ending the L1 and migrating the token. The November measure then set out the mechanism, dates and holder protections; before the vote, the team stressed that nothing would move without approval.

Now that the second vote passed, the governance record shows a two-stage authorization path rather than an aspirational announcement. The earlier result established direction, and the later result supplied the implementation mandate. The two votes establish authority to proceed, but governance approval cannot guarantee that every transfer will work.

What does ZetaChain's history explain?

ZetaChain launched its L1 mainnet in February 2024 and built its reputation on interoperability. It connected Ethereum, Bitcoin and Solana through cross-chain bridges, allowing assets to move and be managed across those networks. Solana was therefore not a new destination; it was already one of the chains covered by the project's bridging model.

The migration reverses one part of that architecture. ZetaChain will remove its own settlement layer while moving $ZETA onto a network it already bridged. The source does not describe the disposition of bridges or broader service continuity around the shutdown.

The measure therefore should not be read as a complete wind-down of every ZetaChain product. The history explains Solana's selection, but the vote record does not define the full operational wind-down.

What did the market make of the decision?

$ZETA slipped about 5.6% over the preceding 24 hours, and the move occurred within a day of the vote closing. The report does not establish that governance caused the decline or identify other contributing factors, so the price move offers weak evidence of a durable market judgment. The market signal remains inconclusive.

For holders, the immediate issue is the conversion and shutdown timetable, not a one-day market move. The next fixed checkpoint is the approximately December 9 shutdown; until the team publishes a claims deadline or exchange instructions, the record does not show how much preparation time holders have. Execution readiness is the clearer test than the reported 5.6% decline.