The teams behind Ethereum and Base have decided to pursue separate developments for two account abstraction mechanisms: EIP-8141 and EIP-8130. This decision was announced by Ethlabs researcher Derek Chiang.

I'm sad to report that the AA collab between 8130 and 8141 (Frames) broke down last week, and Base and Ethereum are now going separate ways to implement different AA standards.

I want to share some reflections on this collab and on the future of the EVM.

For a long time, the…

— Derek Chiang | Ethlabs (@decentrek) September 14, 2026

Both proposals aim to integrate certain wallet functionalities directly into the protocol. This would enable users to confirm transactions using a smartphone access key, consolidate multiple actions into a single transaction, and designate another party to pay transaction fees.

Reasons for the Split

The authors of these proposals sought to establish a common standard for both Ethereum and Base. However, discussions concluded last week due to differing requirements for the future mechanism.

According to Chiang, Ethereum developers focused on resilience against censorship, privacy, and security, while Base prioritized scalability, customization options, and regulatory compliance.

“We found several technical solutions, but each required one side to concede on key goals,” he stated.

Consequently, the teams opted to advance EIP-8130 and EIP-8141 independently.

If both proposals are implemented, wallet developers will need to accommodate two distinct native transaction formats—one for Ethereum and another for Base.

Chiang acknowledged that users might not notice the differences if applications can automatically determine the required format. However, this could increase the workload for wallet developers.

Key Differences Between the Proposals

EIP-8141 divides transactions into programmable stages, referred to as "frames." These stages verify the sender, identify the fee payer, and execute user-defined actions.

This mechanism allows for changing the method of transaction confirmation without needing to transfer assets to a new address. Specifically, wallets could switch from current secp256k1 keys to alternative signing schemes, which is viewed as a preparatory step for Ethereum against potential quantum attacks.

The proposal also supports batch operations and allows fees to be paid by a different account, meaning users do not need to pre-load ETH in every wallet.

In contrast, EIP-8130, developed by Coinbase engineer Chris Hunter, takes a different approach. It suggests storing account configuration—permitted keys, confirmation methods, and their permissions—in a separate on-chain Keystore.

When sending a transaction, the wallet specifies the confirmation method in advance, enabling nodes to determine the necessary computations without executing arbitrary code. The document outlines a limited set of standard authentication methods for high-performance Layer 2 networks.

Both proposals are currently drafts, so their specifications may evolve. EIP-8141 has been included in the Hegota upgrade plan, while the timeline for implementing EIP-8130 remains unspecified.

It is worth noting that in September, the Ethereum Foundation assigned EIP-8141 a top priority. This proposal is one of two essential components for Hegota, alongside the censorship-resistance mechanism FOCIL.