ENCLAVES
Token contracts

Two contracts. Separated concerns.

The RWA contract enforces ownership and compliance for a specific real-world asset (ERC-20 + ERC-3643). ENCL is a separate, plain ERC-20 utility token that Enclave Operators bond against their conduct — it has no claim on any asset and cannot move asset ownership.

Asset token · ERC-20 + ERC-3643

The RWA contract

Every asset issued under ENCLAVES is its own contract instance — an ERC-20 with full ERC-3643 (T-REX) semantics, cloned by the platform's token factory as an EIP-1167 minimal proxy. The contract is the enforcement layer for a trusted platform: the platform decides; the contract records and enforces.

One contract per asset. Per-asset state machine, per-asset supply, per-asset compliance rules, per-asset maturity. The Enclave Operator — acting on behalf of the bankruptcy-remote SPV that holds title — is the only party authorised to flip the contract’s mint switch, and even then only when every Mint Authorization flag has been independently set by Verification Events and the operator’s ENCL bond is live.

ERC-3643 invariant

Compliance-checked transfers

Every transfer is routed through the configured Identity Registry and Compliance module before it can execute. Unverified addresses cannot receive; jurisdictional rules, Enclave approval, and freeze lists are evaluated atomically on each move.

mintReady gate

Gated mint

Mint is conditional on a set of Mint Authorization flags (verification events, Enclave Operator approval, custody confirmation, no encumbrances) AND a live ENCL staking bond. The contract reads these flags on every mint — there is no override path for the issuer or the platform.

one-way

Supply discipline

maxSupply is set at initialisation and never raised. mintFinalized is a one-way switch; once flipped, no further mint is possible from any address, in any role, ever. Asset owners cannot be diluted by governance.

on-chain state

Lifecycle state machine

Each asset progresses through an explicit on-chain state: Registered → Issued → Active → Mature → Retired. Transitions are role-gated and emit events; downstream systems (Trust Score, asset registries, audit log) read the on-chain state as source of truth.

ERC20Snapshot

Snapshot capability

The contract inherits ERC20Snapshot semantics. A platform-driven snapshot captures every holder’s balance at a block, enabling income distributions, voting, and audit reconstruction without iterating storage at distribution time.

permissionless claim

Maturity & buyback

Optional one-shot maturity terms (buyback token, price per share, maturity date) are configured once and locked. After maturity, holders trigger a permissionless burn-to-claim against a pre-funded escrow — the contract returns proceeds without needing platform action.

with reason code

Forced-transfer recovery

Sanctions, legal orders, and fraud recovery use a platform-driven forced transfer that records an explicit on-chain reason code. The path exists, is auditable, and is bounded — a transfer the SPV does not recognize is not a transfer of ownership at all.

enumerable sets

Holder + investor tracking

The contract maintains both per-wallet and per-ONCHAINID enumerable holder sets — distribution targets, regulatory reporting, and holder caps are derivable on-chain without off-chain reconciliation.

Role separation

No single party can issue.

Roles on the contract follow ERC-3643's agent model, refined for ENCLAVES' four-way split — issuer, platform, Enclave Operator, and Enclave SPV. Every privileged action requires at least two independent parties.

Issuer (ERC-173 owner)

Owns the contract instance. Cannot mint, cannot move assets — owner role is structural, not operational.

Platform agent

Toggles Mint Authorization flags as Verification Events arrive, drives lifecycle transitions, triggers snapshots, and invokes forced transfers with explicit reason codes.

Enclave Operator

Authorises minting from the Enclave side, on behalf of the SPV that holds legal title. Mint requires both platform flags AND Enclave Operator approval — no single role can issue alone. The operator’s bonded ENCL is the slashable stake.

Mint preconditions

Every condition checked on every mint

There is no path to mint that skips one of these. ThemintReady()check is consulted inside the contract on each call.

  • All verification flags setLegal, custody, operational, and class-specific Verification Events have all been recorded by independent parties.
  • Enclave Operator approval liveThe Enclave Operator has authorised mint, acting on behalf of the SPV that holds legal title. The approval is revocable.
  • ENCL staking bond postedThe contract consults the issuer’s StakingBond on every mint. No bond → no mint, even with full verification.
  • Cooling period elapsedTime-based safety window between the last condition flip and the earliest possible mint.
Utility token · ERC-20 + Permit

ENCL

A plain ERC-20 with EIP-2612 permit, fixed supply minted in full at deployment to the treasury. No pause, no freeze, no blacklist, no upgrade path, no mint capability beyond initial issuance. ENCL is intentionally not ERC-3643.

What it is

Freely transferable utility token

ENCL is the platform’s bonding and service token. It lives in its own repository so it can be governed, audited, and rotated independently of the RWA contracts.

  • · Standard ERC-20 with EIP-2612 permit (gasless approvals)
  • · Fixed supply, minted in full to treasury at deployment
  • · No pause, no freeze, no blacklist, no upgrade path
  • · No mint capability beyond the deployment-time supply
  • · Circulating supply can only shrink — through StakingBond.slash()
Why not ERC-3643

Composability is the point

ENCL needs to flow through staking contracts, DeFi rails, and exchange listings without permissioning friction. The discipline lives in the RWA contract, not the utility token.

  • · Freely transferable — composable with DeFi and CEXs
  • · No platform discretion over balances
  • · Slashing is a transfer to slash receivers, not a balance edit
  • · Governance touches protocol parameters, not balances

The two contracts read each other.

The RWA contract calls into the issuer’s StakingBond on every mint. ENCL itself is unaware of asset tokens — it just tracks balances. The relationship is one-way: the RWA contract consults ENCL via StakingBond, never the other way around.
ENCL functions

Five jobs, all tied to actual network usage.

ENCL underwrites the trust layer. Every major function of the network requires it, creating demand tied to real usage rather than speculation.

01

Issuer bonding

Operators stake ENCL through the StakingBond contract before any RWA token under their Enclave can mint. The bond is proportional to risk profile and Trust Class. Misrepresentation is slashable.

PurposeAccountability
MechanismLock + slashing on proven fraud
02

Issuance capacity

The on-chain bond ceiling sets how much asset value an operator can issue. Scale follows responsibility — capacity is not granted, it is earned by staking.

PurposeRate limit
MechanismStake → capacity
03

Service payments

Registration, verification coordination, attestation handling, and lifecycle event processing are paid in ENCL. Demand is tied to actual network activity.

PurposeUsage demand
MechanismPay-per-use
04

Verifier incentives

Custodians, registrars, and legal counsel are rewarded for accurate, timely attestations. Incentives reward correctness; bonds penalise behaviour that introduces risk.

PurposeCoordination
MechanismPerformance-based rewards
05

Protocol-only governance

ENCL governs protocol parameters — bonding requirements, attestation standards, lifecycle rule templates. It cannot intervene in individual Enclave operations or change the status of an issued asset.

PurposeProtocol calibration
MechanismTime-delayed, time-bound votes
Economic design

Principles, not pie charts.

The protocol's economic posture is durable. Detailed allocation, emission schedule, and circulating-supply mechanics are finalised at Phase 3 (Tranche 1) and published with simulation analysis before activation.

Value from use, not speculation

Demand is driven by staking, capacity allocation, service payments, and verifier rewards — all tied to real economic activity.

Economic accountability

Staking and slashing produce direct economic consequences for misconduct. Operators carry real skin in the game; the RWA contract reads the bond on every mint.

Supply discipline

Fixed total supply, minted in full at deployment, no further mint capability. ENCL circulating supply can only shrink — through slashing transfers from StakingBond.

Long-term alignment

Team, advisor, and early-backer allocations are subject to multi-year vesting with cliff periods. No early sell pressure.

Token allocation breakdowns and emission curves will be published alongside the security review in Phase 3. We do not commit to specific percentages on the marketing site ahead of governance and legal sign-off — see the roadmap for sequencing.

Stay close to the build

Monthly engineering, legal, and roadmap updates. No marketing filler.