Quick overview [2025-11-20]
- Trust Wallet has launched Gas Sponsorship, a feature that covers certain gas fees for users when they no longer have any native balance.
- The team communicates about crossing a milestone of more than $100M in sponsored swap volume, presenting gasless swaps as “the new standard” for wallets.
- For DustEthic, this is a strong signal: “gasless” flows are no longer just a theoretical idea, but a real UX direction on the wallet side.
1. What Trust Wallet has launched
On November 12, 2025, Trust Wallet published an official article titled “Trust Wallet Now Sponsors Your Gas Fees”.
The idea is simple:
-
- if you want to make a swap but your native token balance (BNB, SOL, etc.) is 0,
- the app detects that you are short on gas,
- and it automatically covers the fees for eligible transactions, in order to avoid the “not enough gas” error and complicated top-ups.
In this first version:
BNB Chain
-
- up to 4 sponsored swaps per day,
- no minimum amount.
Solana
-
- up to 4 sponsored swaps per day,
- minimum amount around 200 USD.
Ethereum and other networks
-
- announced as “coming soon”.
The actions covered today are swaps, and Trust Wallet indicates that transfers (send) will follow.
In parallel, Trust Wallet had already launched FlexGas, which allows users to pay fees in USDT, USDC or TWT by relying on EIP-7702 and an internal paymaster system.
This context shows that their Gas Sponsorship program is part of a broader strategy of abstracting gas.
2. The “new standard” tweet
On X and other social networks, Trust Wallet communicated about a milestone:
“Milestone unlocked: Over $100M+ in user swap volume sponsored by Trust Wallet. Gas-free swaps aren’t a ‘nice to have.’ They’re the new standard for wallets.”
A few important clarifications:
- this figure of $100M in sponsored swap volume is a statement from Trust Wallet;
- to the best of my knowledge, there is not (yet) any independent source that aggregates or audits it, so we can only report it as such;
- the expression “new standard for wallets” is clearly a marketing positioning, not a formal technical standard like an ERC/EIP.
But even with these nuances, the message remains interesting for DustEthic:
-
- a mainstream wallet with a large user base
- insists that “gas-free” is part of the expected experience, and not just a “premium” mode.
3. Why this matters for DustEthic
DustEthic starts from the same observation as many projects around Account Abstraction:
asking a user to first buy gas before being able to:
-
- make a swap,
- interact with a dApp,
- or donate a few “dusts”,
is an excellent way to break the experience and lose potential micro-donations.
For DustEthic, this translates into a few key principles.
Reduce friction on the donor side
- ideally, the donor should not see a screen saying “you do not have enough gas to donate your dusts”;
- network costs should be covered via:
- paymasters,
- gas sponsorship programs,
- or a relayer commission that includes gas, while remaining fully traceable on-chain.
Maintain full traceability
-
- each DustEthic aggregation remains documented on-chain,
- fees (gas, commissions, possible L2 discounts) remain visible in the campaign’s flows.
What Trust Wallet shows is that this logic is no longer limited to a handful of niche DeFi dApps:
-
- abstracting gas,
- avoiding the step “go get some native token before you can do anything”,
is becoming a central argument of wallet UX.
4. How the DustEthic Standard positions itself
The DustEthic Standard is deliberately agnostic:
-
- not dependent on any particular wallet,
- not locked into one specific paymaster implementation or vendor,
- designed to be adopted by different wallets, relayers or donation platforms.
Recommendation – “Gasless” donor journey when possible
When the infrastructure allows it (Account Abstraction, paymasters, Gas Sponsorship programs, etc.), DustEthic implementations should offer a donation flow with no explicit gas fees for the donor.
Network costs are then:
-
- included in the relayer’s commission,
- or covered by a transparent gas sponsorship program,
- or distributed in a documented hybrid model.
In all cases, flows remain traceable on-chain and readable for the beneficiary NGO.
Trust Wallet is used here as a concrete example:
-
- it proves that a gas sponsorship program at scale is viable at least on some chains,
- it shows how a wallet can carry this logic without turning the user into a gas expert.
But DustEthic does not depend on it, and is not limited to it: other wallets (or relayers) can implement similar approaches, as long as:
-
- the flow remains non-custodial,
- costs and commissions remain public and documented,
- and DustEthic aggregations comply with the standard.
5. What readers can take away
For an external reader (wallet, NGO, infra), the key points are:
-
- the UX trend: gas is no longer seen as a “technical detail”, but as a major adoption barrier that wallets are starting to handle on behalf of the user;
- the DustEthic specificity:
- focus on aggregated micro-donations,
- multi-wallet, multi-relayer model,
- and an open standard that can plug into different Account Abstraction or gas sponsorship infrastructures.
For people discovering DustEthic through this article, here are a few pointers to explore further:
-
- the DustEthic Standard,
- the Relayers page,
- the Full DustEthic Guide on GitHub.
Note – About Gas Sponsorship and Trust Wallet’s business model
Gas Sponsorship is not primarily an act of philanthropy, but a UX and growth decision for Trust Wallet:
reducing “not enough gas” friction, increasing the number of executed swaps, and strengthening the overall Trust Wallet ecosystem, including TWT and related features such as FlexGas and Trust Premium.1
Based on the public information available at the time of writing, Trust Wallet does not provide a detailed breakdown of how the Gas Sponsorship program is financed (split between swap revenues, TWT strategy, marketing budget, etc.).2
Rather than speculating on these aspects, we simply note that Gas Sponsorship is a real program, with clear limits (daily quotas, supported networks, minimum amounts), and that it fits into a broader strategy of gas abstraction and user retention.
From a DustEthic perspective, the point is not to analyse Trust Wallet’s business model in depth, but to show that a mainstream wallet can choose to cover gas costs for some flows, without any capital or contractual link between Trust Wallet and our project.
1 See Trust Wallet’s official announcements on Gas Sponsorship and FlexGas, as well as TWT related communication,
where these features are framed as key parts of the Trust Wallet experience.
2 To the best of our knowledge, no public source (blog, roadmap, documentation) provides a precise breakdown of how Gas Sponsorship
is financed at the date of this article.