# RFC: Wish For Change — recover native DOT backing stranded Moonbeam xcDOT **URL:** \ **Category:** Governance\ **Created:** [October 22, 2026, 2:01pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/rfc-wish-for-change-recover-native-dot-backing-stranded-moonbeam-xcdot/19077 "2026-10-22T14:01:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tradetiger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3ab097/32.png) [@tradetiger](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/tradetiger)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2026, 2:01pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/rfc-wish-for-change-recover-native-dot-backing-stranded-moonbeam-xcdot/19077/1 "2026-10-22T14:01:49Z")
Hello Polkadot community, Technical Fellowship, and OpenGov voters, This is a proposal draft, not a personal claim. I previously opened a Governance thread titled “Advice requested: recovery path for DOT backing stranded xcDOT after Moonbeam shutdown”. Related on-chain context: > [@Moonbeam referendum 161 moved the DOT, USDC and USDT backing xcDOT, xcUSDC and xcUSDT out of the sovereign account. Moonbeam team, what is the plan?](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/moonbeam-referendum-161-moved-the-dot-usdc-and-usdt-backing-xcdot-xcusdc-and-xcusdt-out-of-the-sovereign-account-moonbeam-team-what-is-the-plan/18826): > > On Aug 5, Moonbeam governance ([ref 161](https://moonbeam.subscan.io/referenda_v2/161)) transferred 233,105 DOT, 107,463 USDC and 174,265 USDT backing xcDOT/xcUSDC/xcUSDT from their sovereign account on Polkadot Asset Hub into an ordinary account[[1](https://assethub-polkadot.subscan.io/block/19097284?tab=event&event=19097284-7)][[2](https://assethub-polkadot.subscan.io/block/19097284?tab=event&event=19097284-5)][[3](https://assethub-polkadot.subscan.io/block/19097284?tab=event&event=19097284-3)]. Holders were told the helpdesk "could not assist with an individual xcDOT migration When (UTC) Chain, block Event 2026-08-01 00:01 Moonbeam 16,672,927 Open Technical Committee enters maintenance mode. All Balances, EVM, Ethereum and XCM calls rejected for users. 2026-08-05 14:39 … ## Why this is stuck Moonbeam entered maintenance mode on 1 August 2026. User transactions, EVM, and XCM stopped. xcDOT is only a wrapped representation. The backing is native DOT. Moonbeam helpdesk has already told at least some holders that it cannot assist with an individual xcDOT migration. The GLMR/MOVR late-claim window is a separate process and does not cover xcDOT. bkchr’s point still stands: this should be one proposal for all holders, with a list that anyone can verify. It should not be a series of one-off refunds. ## What is already public - Terminal xcDOT supply: about 233,451.67 - Public snapshot: 11,785 non-zero addresses, about 233,450.68 xcDOT, with Substrate state proofs against Moonbeam’s terminal state root - Snapshot and tools: [GitHub - libingjiang47/xcdot-recovery-kit · GitHub](https://github.com/libingjiang47/xcdot-recovery-kit) On 5 August 2026, Moonbeam referendum 161 moved the DOT (and the USDC/USDT backing xcUSDC/xcUSDT) out of the Asset Hub sovereign account to the ordinary account: 12gMyzugTFJTY1nqeqCcfoPC6R3YeozbRZNhRmPMW5Kmjvn1 So this is no longer a simple “unlock the sovereign account” problem. A recovery path still needs a network position. This RFC is limited to xcDOT / native DOT. Other xc-assets can follow the same method later if the community wants that, but mixing every case into one vote will stall this again. ## What I am asking OpenGov to signal Please support a Wish For Change referendum (system.remark) with this order of preference: A. Moonbeam Foundation / the controller of the remaining backing distributes remaining DOT to holders against the public snapshot. For ordinary EOA holders, Asset Hub fallback accounts are already defined (Moonbeam 20-byte address + twelve 0xEE bytes, SS58 prefix 0). Distribution can be batched transfers. No keys need to be collected in a helpdesk email. B. If A does not happen, remaining backing is returned to the sovereign account or to an account Polkadot governance controls, and then distributed against the same snapshot. C. Only if A and B do not happen, consider further OpenGov action. Contracts, DeFi pools, and smart accounts should be a second phase. EOA free balances can be handled first. I am an affected EOA holder. I am not asking OpenGov to process my wallet alone, and I will not post a destination address or keys here. ## Proposed remark text If this RFC looks acceptable, the on-chain remark can be: “OpenGov signals that native DOT backing stranded Moonbeam xcDOT should be returned to holders using a publicly verifiable terminal snapshot. Preference: (A) the current custodian distributes remaining DOT to holders’ Asset Hub fallback accounts; (B) remaining funds are moved to an account controlled by Polkadot governance for the same distribution; (C) further OpenGov action only if A and B do not occur. EOA holders first; contracts and protocol positions in a later phase. This is not the GLMR/MOVR Base migration.” ## What is needed next 1. Review of the snapshot, proofs, and EOA vs contract split. 2. Agreement on the remark text. 3. A sponsor for the Wish For Change decision deposit (20,000 DOT). 4. Submission on the Wish For Change track only. Not Root. I can help coordinate holders and keep this thread to one proposal. Please comment if the remark should be narrower, if the snapshot needs a specific correction, or if someone can sponsor the decision deposit. Thank you.