Proposal to change the token Tax structure (UPDATED 1) (UPDATED 2)

Proposal Discussion
1
  • New proposal idea 1
  • New proposal idea 2
  • None of the proposals, keep the tax as it is
  • I just want to see the results

0 voters

With everything that has happened over the last few months the trading volume of both $BSL tokens has increased massively.
This has brought a lot of funds for the SLP, which is great.
But the tax on all transactions is rather a lot. And especially the tax for transfers is confusing and unique, which definitely has thrown people off.

Current tax structure is 4% on all transfers. Buy, Sell and Transfer transactions are taxed 4%

Hereby i want to propose the following changes in the tax structure:

After the comments and looking at the contract the buy and sell tax have to be the same. In the ‘summary’ you can see the original proposal. Below you can find the new proposal

INVALIDATED ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. (click the 'summary’below)

Summary

  • Buy tax: keep at 4%, 2% or 2.5%. Make it more interesting for people to buy. Lower entry.

  • Sell tax: keep at 4%, 4.5% or 5%. To incentify holding.

  • Transfer tax: 0.5% or 0%. So people do not get punished if they for example want to move funds to a cold storage address that is not used for trading.

NEW PROPOSAL IDEA 1. (click the ‘summary’ below)

Summary

Right now the SLP (onchain) sits at around 500,000 USD (estimated). This seems like a lot, but can be used up quickly when bigger loans come in.

So i am thinking of the following.

SLP from current amount to 1,500,000 USD

  • Buy tax: keep at 4%
  • Sell tax: keep at 4%
  • Transfer tax: 0%

From 1,500,001 USD to 3,000,000 USD

  • Buy tax: lower to 3.5%
  • Sell tax: lower to 3.5%
  • Transfer tax: 0%

From 3,000,001 USD to 5,000,000 USD

  • Buy tax: lower to 3%
  • Sell tax: lower to 3%
  • Transfer tax: 0%

From 5,000,001 USD to 7,500,000 USD

  • Buy tax: lower to 2.5%
  • Sell tax: lower to 2.5%
  • Transfer tax: 0%

From 7,500,001 USD to 10,500,000 USD

  • Buy tax: lower to 2%
  • Sell tax: lower to 2%
  • Transfer tax: 0%

From 10,500,001 USD to 14,000,000 USD

  • Buy tax: lower to 1.5%
  • Sell tax: lower to 1.5%
  • Transfer tax: 0%

From 14,000,001 USD to unlimited

  • Buy tax: lower to 1%
  • Sell tax: lower to 1%
  • Transfer tax: 0%

Hard cap tax of 1% until this is revisited by the DAO.

I am basing this idea on the fact that if the SLP gets to the amounts shown above the holder count and there for the volume should have increased enough to keep generating enough fees with a lower tax amount. SLP amount requirements and or Tax % can be changed accordingly.

Now i am not sure if there should be mechanism in place to possibly raise the tax if the SLP gets to low and needs to be replenished again. This can be done by for example taking a snapshot every 6 or 8 months, and if the SLP amount is below the current tax rate it goes back up.

NEW PROPOSAL IDEA 2.

This one is simple.

Buy tax 4%
Sale tax 4%
Transfer tax 0%

Lets discuss! Share your thoughts.
If i see multiple people with the same idea i will add it in the proposal.

Thank you for your time!

Regards,

Glastirr

7 Likes
2

I think keep the 4% for buy and sell and 0% for transfer.

7 Likes
3

Definitely like the 0% transfer.

6 Likes
4

Does the tax not have to be the same value?

5

This i am unsure about, and something the team will have to clarify

6

I like the proposal for 0% transfer tax. It shouldn’t be an issue with the KYC/Verification we have in place, right?
I do remember a discussion on a previous DAO that sell and buy tax has to be the same value. I would support lowering it too, but we need to figure out how to increase our SLP before we change it.

1 Like
7

i am not sure why that would be an issue with KYC. Can you explain your thoughts?

8

A few points:

  1. I think it would be good to include in the proposal what length of time it took for the SLP to get to $500k. That was the first question I asked myself when looking at the tiered structure is, “What is the potential timeline or range that could be expected for this based on historical data”. And then my next sentence was, “I’m way to lazy to figure that out myself.” Lol.

  2. Secondly, I disagree with the 0% transfer tax, and for those who are for the 0% transfer tax, here is just one reason why I am against. A 0% transfer tax will enable unlimited “OTC” trading. While this is not really a major detrimental issue, in my personal preference I think all movement should contribute to the SLP if all members are benefiting from the SLP. It doesn’t have to be much. Even something like 0.1% so that if there are mega whales out there trying to “OTC trade”, their moves contribute to the pool, yet the percentage is still small enough to where regular members aren’t getting scalped moving their funds around.

  3. Lastly, something to consider would be different tax for Buy vs Sell. Again, nothing that will throw the equilibrium out of whack here, but to drop the Buy tax 1% from whatever the Sell tax is, would not harm the SLP if it creates a higher volume of buys, and would give the optics that you get more bang for your buck while also incentivizing longer term holding.

1 Like
9

I don’t think this is a good idea. 1.) A few mi in a SLP is not going to generate much interest for folks. If we hit the daily volume in time I think we can generate we should get this very high - I am talking 50 mi or more then we can start seeing some nice interest returns and it can keep growing. If our goal is we are just going to get to a little bit of SLP and then reduce the tax so it doesn’t grow as much then I don’t see the point. The math will not work out and we could see interest from staking go down vs. up. That is the incentive long time holders probably have more tokens and can get more interest reducing sell pressure, new holders still get a decent interest return on staking, everybody knows it can keep going up and up and never stop. 2.) It would suck to be like I paid in this tax (been paying it for over 3 years now) and then new people don’t have to. I see the DAO/SLP is like having fractional ownership of it - that is what the taxes bought you. It is like we all went in and bought a real estate property and we rent it out. Why would someone get the same amount of ownership % even though they didn’t pay much tax? It doesn’t make sense in my mind and is not fair. This also increases sell pressure if the sell tax is less.

We should be focused on growing the SLP and investing every bit of it, even in things like CDs or bonds that pay above 5% for funds not being lent out (we need a strong plan in place for funds not lent out). What happened to exchange liquidity as well to banksocial. I also think once DE-FY and more credit union partners and alliances emerge we will have all the opportunities we need to lend money to them or do lending directly.

A few thoughts:
1.) I possibly may be ok with lower buy and higher sell if technical possible with Hedera. But not sure, I think that still hurts long time holders because we are changing it after 3 years. At some point I will probably trim my holder down when our market cap is way high. 4 and 4 might just need to be kept forever.
2.) This is for @PresidentHODL - is there a way to do this on the backend instead of setting slippage? Essentially the contract puts 4% in the SLP regardless as permanent code instead of having to set. I think this is most of the problem is that people are confused about slippage.
3.) We need to get rid of it for transfers but believe this has to be done in the app as a technical solution so people can’t game the system and figure out ways to avoid the sell tax.

4 Likes
10

We have several years in bear and just building we had little volume. Most the SLP comes from first few months and the last 3 months. So knowing length time should not have any weight to this. We all expect the project will continue to grow and snowball and bringing in huge volume once DE-FY, more and more CU’s and members are onboarding and other products are out. Your second point is a good point. I know @PresidentHODL said the might be able to a technical solution in the app - maybe this can prevent it. Three is a good point - it would suck a bit for anyone that paid the 4/4 because essentially you are saying they will pay more tax if they sell and new folks didn’t have to pay the 4 to get in. So on the fence on that.

2 Likes
11

I agree with this proposal. Definitely should be 0% transfer tax across the board. I also like the idea of the tiered buy and sell tax %. I am onboard with this!

2 Likes
12

As far as being a long term holder ( I have been as well) the plan is to eventually get rid of the 4% tax anyways though. So i think this is a step in the right direction. Eventually new investors wont be paying that tax.

1 Like
13

I never heard of eventually getting rid of the tax… So are you staying we should get rid of one of the products the SLP and the staking piece of that.

14

No, Ive just heard that there are plans in the future to get rid of the tax.

15

Staking rewards will be based on the repayments of the loans.

16

0% tax transfer makes sense. This was proposed before and there was issues so Team needs to figure out how to proceed. The rest of this proposal does not make sense - this is part of the fundamentals of the project. Money goes to SLP, holders own SLP and get rewards from it, SLP keeps growing exponentially as more holders/transactions happen, the longer you stay the better your rewards. Maybe we can revisit way down the road but this is way to early to discuss.

2 Likes
17

That would be interesting if could get rid of the slippage and it is built in. Lots of confusion and fud around this would go away.

2 Likes
18

Transfer yes, everything else no. I get that Hedera folks don’t like tax but I think we are not doing a good job right now explaining this concept to them. Cheers!

1 Like
19

Agree with this. Cheers

1 Like
20

Great feedback. Appreciated.:+1:

1 Like