Short answer: ATS tokenomics is a fee model in which network fees are charged in one token — ATS — instead of each chain's native gas coin, and the ATS collected is burned, driving total supply down from an initial 100,000,000 toward a 30,000,000 floor. In the WATS wallet this works through ERC-4337 account abstraction on EVM chains, where a paymaster settles the native gas on your behalf, and through LayerZero OFT, which makes ATS a single omnichain token spendable across Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Polygon, BNB Chain, Solana and TON. It is not a discount: the network still receives its native gas underneath, so the model changes which token pays, not what the transaction costs. The burn is driven by real usage rather than a fixed calendar — and none of it touches custody, because WATS is non-custodial and never holds a key.
Two frictions most wallets never fix
Multi-chain crypto has two quiet taxes. The first is native gas: every chain insists on being paid in its own coin — ETH on the EVM world, SOL on Solana, Toncoin on TON — so you keep idle balances of tokens you never wanted just to move the tokens you do. The second is rarely discussed: most wallet fee and utility tokens are inflationary or static, so the fees they collect pile up somewhere rather than reducing supply. Chains themselves sometimes do better — Ethereum's EIP-1559 burns the base fee of every transaction — but that burn applies to the chain's own coin, not to the token a wallet charges you in. WATS answers both with one design — and does it without ever taking custody of your keys.
Charged in ATS, not native gas
In the WATS Hot Wallet, every action — transfers, swaps, staking — is charged in a single token, ATS (Alltoscan Token), instead of the native gas of whatever chain you are on. From your side, no ETH, SOL or Toncoin leaves your wallet; ATS does. The network still receives its native gas underneath — that never goes away — but a paymaster on EVM chains, or an equivalent fee-payer on Solana and TON, settles it for you, so provisioning a separate gas balance on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Polygon, BNB Chain, Solana and TON stops being your job.
What ERC-4337 does here
On EVM chains, the mechanism is ERC-4337, the account-abstraction standard. It introduces a paymaster: a component that can pay a transaction's native gas on your behalf while charging you in a different token. That is the precise step where "pay in ATS instead of ETH" happens. ERC-4337 is an EVM standard, so it governs the EVM side; on Solana and TON, an equivalent fee-payer/relayer plays the same role. The point is not the plumbing on any one chain — it is that you never have to think about the native gas token again.
What OFT does here
A single fee token is only simple if it is genuinely one token everywhere. ATS is a LayerZero OFT — an Omnichain Fungible Token — which means it exists natively across chains rather than as a pile of wrapped or bridged copies. One ATS balance is spendable on EVM, Solana and TON alike. Combine that with ERC-4337-style abstraction and the result is the experience the ATS fee model promises: hold one token, transact anywhere, never chase native gas.
Not a discount — a change in which token pays
This is the detail worth being precise about, because it is the one most often misread. The ATS fee model does not make blockchain transactions cheaper by decree. Ethereum still charges its gas, Solana still charges its fee, TON still charges its own — the underlying cost of a transaction is set by the network, not by a wallet. What changes is the denomination: you settle in ATS, and the paymaster or fee-payer converts that into the native gas the chain demands. The saving is operational rather than monetary. You stop maintaining eight small gas balances, you stop bridging dust to top them up, and you stop failing transactions because one chain's gas ran dry. Any explainer that pitches ATS as a discount on gas is describing something WATS does not claim.
The burn: from 100,000,000 to 30,000,000
Here is where WATS parts company with ordinary fee tokens. The ATS collected as fees is not recycled or pooled — it is burned. Every fee paid permanently removes ATS from circulation, driving total supply down from an initial 100,000,000 toward a 30,000,000 floor. It is a deflationary model powered by ordinary use: the more the wallet is used, the scarcer ATS becomes, until supply settles at roughly a third of where it started. The burn is a design commitment tied to real activity, not a fixed calendar, so the pace tracks usage rather than a countdown.
The first and only wallet to combine both
Plenty of wallets abstract gas: ERC-4337 paymasters bring token-paid gas to EVM apps that adopt them, and a few wallets route fees through a sponsor. What no other wallet does is put these together the way WATS does — ERC-4337 + OFT single-token fees, charged instead of native gas on every transfer, paired with a fee burn that drives supply from 100M down to 30M. That specific combination is what makes WATS the first and only wallet of its kind, and it is a claim grounded in mechanism, not marketing: the standards are open, the token is one omnichain asset, and the burn is visible in supply.
What it does not change: your keys
None of this touches custody. WATS is non-custodial across all four products — the Chrome Extension, the Mobile App, the Hot Wallet and the NFC Metal Card: you hold your own keys, and WATS never holds a key. Paying fees in ATS does not hand control to anyone, and burning ATS does not either. The NFC Metal Card does not change the picture: it authenticates with a tap to keys that live in the WATS apps, rather than storing keys itself. The fee token decides which token pays; the burn decides how supply changes; custody — who can authorise a move of funds — stays entirely with you. Conflating a single fee token with a single point of control gets the model exactly backwards.
Where to go next
For the canonical reference on how a charge is estimated and taken, see the ATS fee page. For a first-hand walk through the fee flow and how self-custody relates, read how the WATS ATS single fee token works. If you want to see the mechanism rather than read about it, the practical next step is to open the WATS Hot Wallet, hold a single ATS balance, and send on two different chains without topping up either one's native gas — the burn is the same fee you just paid, leaving circulation for good.
Frequently asked questions
Does paying fees in ATS or burning ATS give WATS custody of my funds?
No. WATS is non-custodial across all four products — Chrome Extension, Mobile App, Hot Wallet and NFC Metal Card: you hold your own keys and WATS never holds a key. The fee token and the burn are about which token pays and how supply changes — neither touches who can authorise a transaction from your wallet.
Is paying network fees in ATS a discount on gas?
No, and WATS does not present it as one. WATS charges the fee in ATS instead of the chain's native gas token, and the network still receives its native gas underneath, settled by an ERC-4337 paymaster on EVM chains or an equivalent fee-payer on Solana and TON. The model changes which token pays, not what the transaction costs; the benefit is that you stop maintaining a separate gas balance on every chain.
Is ERC-4337 what lets me pay in ATS on Solana and TON too?
Not directly. ERC-4337 is an EVM standard, so it handles the pay-in-ATS step on EVM chains via a paymaster. On Solana and TON a fee-payer/relayer settles the native cost instead. What makes the experience identical everywhere is LayerZero OFT: ATS is one omnichain token, so a single balance works across EVM, Solana and TON.
Which chains does the WATS ATS fee model cover?
WATS supports Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Polygon, BNB Chain, Solana and TON, and the ATS fee model applies across them: one ATS balance covers network fees on each, so you never hold ETH, POL, BNB, SOL and Toncoin side by side purely to move funds.
Will the ATS supply really drop to 30 million?
WATS burns the ATS it collects as fees, reducing total supply from 100,000,000 toward a 30,000,000 floor. It is driven by real usage rather than a fixed schedule, so the pace depends on activity — the design goal is a 30,000,000 floor, not an overnight cut.