<p>Yes, it would have. In fact, this has happened before in many different blocks.</p>

<p>The Bitcoin wiki has two instances of this <a href="https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply" rel="nofollow noreferrer">documented</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>In block 124724, user midnightmagic solo mined a block which caused one less Satoshi to be created than would otherwise have come into existence. Therefore, all calculations from this block onwards must now, to be accurate, include this underpay in total Bitcoins in existence. Then, in an act of sheer stupidity, a more recent miner who failed to implement RSK properly destroyed an entire block reward of 12.5 XBT in block 501726.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-15T16:17:55.413Z
2019-07-15T16:17:55.413Z
Ava Chow
<p>The current maximum block subsidy is 12.5 bitcoin. A mined block recently got rejected from full nodes after a miner tried to post the block subsidy as 13.26 bitcoin. But what about in the other direction? Would it have been accepted if the miner posted the coinbase transaction with 10 bitcoin?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-15T06:10:54.643Z
Possible duplicate of [Can someone explain this weird mining activity?](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/67009/can-someone-explain-this-weird-mining-activity)
MCCCS
<mining-pools><block><mining-reward><coinbase-transaction>
Can a miner give themselves less than the maximum block subsidy if they wish to do so?
AdaptiveAnalysis
# Can a miner give themselves less than the maximum block subsidy if they wish to do so?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-07-15)

The current maximum block subsidy is 12.5 bitcoin. A mined block recently got rejected from full nodes after a miner tried to post the block subsidy as 13.26 bitcoin. But what about in the other direction? Would it have been accepted if the miner posted the coinbase transaction with 10 bitcoin?

**Tags:** mining-pools, block, mining-reward, coinbase-transaction

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Possible duplicate of [Can someone explain this weird mining activity?](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/67009/can-someone-explain-this-weird-mining-activity)  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-07-15. Score: 2

Yes, it would have. In fact, this has happened before in many different blocks.

The Bitcoin wiki has two instances of this [documented](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply):

> In block 124724, user midnightmagic solo mined a block which caused one less Satoshi to be created than would otherwise have come into existence. Therefore, all calculations from this block onwards must now, to be accurate, include this underpay in total Bitcoins in existence. Then, in an act of sheer stupidity, a more recent miner who failed to implement RSK properly destroyed an entire block reward of 12.5 XBT in block 501726.


---

