[BUG] Non-deterministic quota accounting: 65% of 5-hour session consumed with minimal actual token usage — Max $100 plan

[gudcks0305]

Environment

• Plan: Max ($100/month, 5x usage)
• OS: macOS (Darwin 25.3.0)
• Date: February 26, 2026

Problem

My 5-hour session quota jumped from ~20% to 65% within a handful of message turns. ccusage data shows modest actual token consumption that does not justify consuming 65% of my session window.

Evidence

ccusage output (2026-02-26):

Date	Models	Calls	Input	Output	Cache Creation	Cache Read
2026-02-26	haiku-4-5, opus-4-6, sonnet-4-6	1,300	9,421	~2,150K	~29,696K	~31,857K

Dashboard (claude.ai):

• Current session: 65% used
• Resets in 30 min

The numbers do not add up. How does ~9,421 input tokens and ~2.15M output tokens translate to 65% of a $100/month Max plan's 5-hour window? Where is the remaining 45% being attributed to?

This directly corroborates the findings in #22435, which demonstrated a 1,500x variance in tokens-per-1%-quota (2,517 to 18,531,900) through 5,396 mitmproxy samples. The quota accounting system is either broken or deliberately opaque.

This is not an isolated incident

This exact problem has been reported and documented for over two months across numerous issues:

Issue	Upvotes	Description	Anthropic Response
#16157	536	Instantly hitting limits with Max subscription	"Limits haven't changed"
#23706	59	Opus 4.6 consumes 3x more tokens than 4.5	❌ None
#22435	-	10x burn rate variance with mitmproxy proof	❌ None
#22876	-	429 errors despite dashboard showing available quota	❌ None
#20767	-	Pro quota reduced to ~20 prompts per 5 hours	❌ None (marked stale)
#28927	-	Silent billing change in v2.1.51 routing to Extra Usage	❌ None
#17084	237	Most restrictive limits since Opus 4.5 launch	❌ None

The pattern is clear: hundreds of users, months of data, zero meaningful response.

The only official statement

The sole response from Anthropic (ThariqS, Jan 26) was:

"Rate limits have not changed since Opus 4.5 launch."

This is contradicted by:

1. Empirical data showing 10x burn rate variance on the same account, same day ([BUG] Inconsistent and Undisclosed Quota Accounting Changes in Claude Max Plan. Legal liability claim ready. #22435)
2. Community-estimated ~60% reduction in effective token limits (The Register)
3. The automatic upgrade to Opus 4.6, which benchmarks show generates 3x more tokens for identical tasks — effectively a stealth limit reduction without touching the "rate limit" number
4. Silent billing changes in v2.1.51 routing 200K+ context calls to Extra Usage ([BUG] Silent billing change in v2.1.51: 1M context moved to extra-usage-only without notice — JSONL data proves identical workload billed differently #28927)

Saying "limits haven't changed" while deploying a model that consumes 3x more tokens against unchanged limits is a limit reduction. This is not a technical nuance — it's basic arithmetic.

A word on "Anthropic"

The name "Anthropic" derives from the Greek anthropikos — "of or pertaining to humanity." The company's stated mission is to build AI that is "safe, beneficial, and understandable."

What is neither beneficial nor understandable:

• Charging $100–200/month (Max plan) for a service with undisclosed, non-deterministic quota accounting
• Ignoring months of documented evidence from paying customers, including mitmproxy captures, JSONL billing analysis, and API header data
• Marking legitimate bug reports as "stale" instead of addressing them
• Auto-upgrading users to a 3x more token-hungry model without disclosure or consent, then claiming "limits haven't changed"
• Silently changing billing behavior in patch updates (v2.1.51) without changelog entries
• Moderating criticism on Discord while issues pile up on GitHub unanswered

When developers present 5,396 API samples proving quota inconsistency and the response is silence — or worse, dismissal as "resumption of normal limits" — this is not a company living up to its name. This is consumer deception.

Users in #22435 have already outlined potential violations under UCC 2-313, FTC Act Section 5, and California Business & Professions Code 17200. The legal exposure grows with every week of silence.

What we need — not want, need

1. Publish the quota consumption formula. If quota is based on something other than raw token count, disclose it. Today.
2. Explain the variance. Why does 1% quota cost 2,517 tokens in one session and 18,531,900 in another?
3. Real-time quota visibility in Claude Code CLI — not a hidden settings page on claude.ai
4. Opt-in model upgrades. Do not auto-upgrade to models that burn quota 3x faster
5. Acknowledge the problem exists. Silence is not a strategy. It is a choice, and it speaks louder than any PR statement.

Related Issues

#16157 #17084 #20767 #22435 #22439 #22876 #23706 #27310 #28927

[github-actions]

Found 3 possible duplicate issues:

1. [BUG] Inconsistent and Undisclosed Quota Accounting Changes in Claude Max Plan. Legal liability claim ready. #22435
2. [BUG] Session usage meter accruing at impossible rate — Max plan, single + multi-session usage #25970
3. [BUG] Max 20x plan — Claude Code reports 100% usage while dashboard shows 73%, charged $53 in extra usage #24727

This issue will be automatically closed as a duplicate in 3 days.

• If your issue is a duplicate, please close it and 👍 the existing issue instead
• To prevent auto-closure, add a comment or 👎 this comment

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[kuroanji]

Same here, started from yesterday (Version: 2.1.59).

[nmtitov]

Same here.
I see the same on MAX 100$/month tariff.
Within 15 min session and 10 short messages I got 40% of my 5 hour limit used. Before that I have never ever hit limits with my usage patterns.

[dmurat]

For all participants, which version of claude-code you are using?
Mine is 2.1.59 (the latest one at the moment of writing)

[nmtitov]

@dmurat

$ claude --version
2.1.59 (Claude Code)

[s070681]

2.1.59, windows 11 (10.0.26200), 20x plan

confirming the usage spike - hit 96% session usage in a single moderate conversation. have never ever come close to a session limit on 20x, that's how i noticed it - my session status bar populated and i've never seen it since upgrading to max 20x. luckily hit 90% with only 30 min until reset

/cost is broken for me too - only shows "You are currently using your subscription to power your Claude Code usage" with no actual token/cost breakdown

but i think the usage issue might be a symptom of a deeper auth bug in 2.1.59:

• /doctor reports Config install method: unknown
• every folder prompts to "trust" again, even ones i've used for weeks
• re-authentication prompts fire repeatedly across folders despite valid credentials at ~/.claude/.credentials.json
• auto-compact setting reverts to default on every session start
• claude install fixes it temporarily, then it reverts

possibly related to #28625 and #27910 - if the install method detection is broken, it might not be reading the plan tier correctly, which would explain why usage accounting feels off. each re-auth could also be fragmenting sessions against the quota

downgraded to 2.1.55, same onboarding/trust behavior persisted but once i went through it once it seems to have subsided. so the config damage from 2.1.59 may survive downgrades? i'm not sure yet.

---

worth noting from the 2.1.59 changelog:

Fixed config file corruption: Fixed an issue where running multiple Claude Code instances simultaneously could cause config files to become corrupted, resulting in lost credentials.

MCP OAuth race condition fix: Fixed a race condition in OAuth token refresh when running multiple Claude Code instances simultaneously.

i run multiple cc sessions in parallel panes as my normal workflow and had zero issues before 2.1.59. no config corruption, no auth problems, no usage spikes. whatever this "fix" introduced is worse than the original bug - it seems to have broken install method detection, config persistence, and possibly plan tier recognition in the process

[lemonroti]

Same here, started from yesterday (Version: 2.1.59).
Rollback to 2.1.56 also same again , just reset from limit , using half an hour then hit the 75% limit already

[s070681]

i guess .52 is the one you want to be on for now? i'm not sure. pretty bad this has almost been out for 24h?

[nmtitov]

@s070681 Great observations.

For me I can tell that I clearly do see spiky token burn. Out of my 5 hour limit in 10 simple messages using Opus model.

BUT! I never had any problems with auth. Never had a need to re-authenticate.

/doctor correctly shows me "Config install method: native"
/cost correctly displays breakdown of current context.

Sonnet is still using "pre-update" number of % usage as I can see. I had to send a lot of messages to Sonnet in the same context just to see 1% bump in my 5 hour window limits. Still on 0% of "Sonnet-only limits". With Opus I get at least 5%-10% of % usage of 5 hour window limits on each request.

[mrbarbosa]

I usually end the week around 80% of total usage and I typically have to really push to get there. If the few sessions I had today are any indicator I'll have burned through usage by Saturday and end up at 260% this week.

I'm seeing 3.5x the burn rate.

[Vasiliy-Makogon]

claude --version
2.1.59 (Claude Code)
Ubuntu 22 on WSL

Yesterday, the Sonnet 4.6 model worked flawlessly for a very long time. Today, however, the 4-hour limit was reached on the very first request!

When the limit was reached, the console program went into an uncontrollable stupor, endlessly displaying the limit reached message. No keystroke could stop it.