# Sub-account spending limits via proxy: pin-less UX with bounded risk

**URL:** <https://forum.polkadot.network/t/sub-account-spending-limits-via-proxy-pin-less-ux-with-bounded-risk/17419>\
**Category:** Miscellaneous\
**Created:** [March 30, 2026, 6:31pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/sub-account-spending-limits-via-proxy-pin-less-ux-with-bounded-risk/17419 "2026-03-30T18:31:28Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![wiktorpyk](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/wiktorpyk/32/9413_2.png) [@wiktorpyk](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/wiktorpyk)\
**Post date:** [March 30, 2026, 6:31pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/sub-account-spending-limits-via-proxy-pin-less-ux-with-bounded-risk/17419/1 "2026-03-30T18:31:28Z")

</div>

Has anyone explored adding a daily (or per-epoch) spending limit to a proxy account — effectively creating a “hot wallet tier” that doesn’t require signing for every small transaction?

**The idea**

Polkadot’s `proxy` pallet already supports delegating specific call types to a sub-account. The missing piece is a _value-bounded_ proxy: one that can submit `balances::transfer` calls autonomously up to a configured limit per time window, without prompting the parent account for a signature each time.

The parent account configures the limit and window once. After that, the sub-account spends freely within the allowance — any call exceeding the remaining balance is rejected at the proxy layer, not by the parent key.

**Why this matters**

For mobile and dapp use cases, requiring a signature on every micro-payment causes friction — but exposing the full account key to a less-secure environment isn’t acceptable either. A spending-limited proxy splits the difference: the parent key stays cold, the proxy key lives in browser storage or in mobile wallet app which could skip the pin prompt for it’s usage, and the worst-case exposure is bounded by the daily limit.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![OliverTY](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/oliverty/32/2986_2.png) [@OliverTY](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/OliverTY)\
**Post date:** [March 31, 2026, 11:46am UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/sub-account-spending-limits-via-proxy-pin-less-ux-with-bounded-risk/17419/2 "2026-03-31T11:46:59Z")

</div>

> [@wiktorpyk](#):
>
> The parent account configures the limit and window once. After that, the sub-account spends freely within the allowance — any call exceeding the remaining balance is rejected at the proxy layer, not by the parent key.

This can be built with Smart Contracts on the Hub now. At least for exploring designs and stabilizing it.  
If we directly amend the Proxy pallet, not only is that a very slow process, but it also has a high chance of not meeting what users want in the end.