Changing the Tokenomics to benefit all holders/future holders

I believe we have between $400,000 to $500,000 in the SLP fund. I am guessing that could be anywhere from 5 to 15 hard money loans given out. If we are successful in getting our 1st loan out soon the rest may follow quickly depleting the SLP. We may very well see many new buys and fewer sells of BSL which would hurt the SLP growth. This was discussed in chat, but probably needs to get discussed in here. I feel we should add a buy tax back and decrease the sale tax. I am for a 4% buy and 3% sale or vice versa. I am also open to other ideas. If this takes off like we think it will at its current state the SLP will not benefit new holders as quickly.


Let’s make it simple. To be honest we protect people to sell and let people, including the whale, buy. Clear for me a free tax for buyers and some tax for sellers. Let’s say 7%.

1 Like

I agree that we should change the tokenomics after the first loan is out.
My idea:

  • 1% buy tax
  • 5% sell tax
  • 100% of the tax should go into the slp, no redistribution necessary

Agree all should go to SLP, no redistribution.


@PresidentHODL, can this be done without a new contract if the community decides to go that way?
It would be good to know the “price” of messing with tokenomics for sure.


I am also willing to give up redistribution and have the tax go to the SLP. I’m thinking maybe we keep the buy tax either at 0 or lower than the sale tax rate.

1 Like

I agree with adding a small buy tax (1%), sell tax (5%) all going to the SLP (remove current redistributions.

1 Like

I feel I should elaborate on why I think it is a good idea to have a low buy tax, as well as a higher sale tax:
So, if we introduce say a 1% buy tax (as in my example above):

  • We ride the moonsoon season, which I truly believe is upon us in the following weeks/months
  • 1% is high enough to see a significant rise in the SLP, but not enough to feel it is too much/excessive
  • If someone buys BSL as an investment and they stake, the cost of a 1% tax should be covered in a few months worth of staking rewards (hence, a low but existing buy tax is actually a staking incentive)
  • If someone just buys as a trader to flip it, 1% is still not large enough to scare them away, but I feel we should be able to capitalise on that as well
  • 1% is very close to the default slippage people use, so probably won’t cause constant “how buy/wat slippage” message in telegram or other socials

The existence of a sell tax is pretty much self-explanatory, so I won’t cover it too much, if you want to quit, pay up! :slight_smile:

Lowering the sell tax to 5% can be marketinged. I think this should happen separately from introducing the buy tax, maybe sometime in mid-summer. For now, my vote would just go leave it at 7%, but make all of it go to the SLP.

Why I believe redistribution should go:

  • Compared to the potential (probable) benefits of staking, redistribution is a barely noticeable gain
  • Complicates staking (while we barely gain anything)
  • SLP has to grow as fast as possible if we want BSL to have the bright future it deserves

These are my 2 cents on the topic.


I agree with this, with the start of stacking redistribution may very well move to SLP. In the medium term, it is more beneficial because with a higher SLP more loans are available, which will generate a greater cash flow and, consequently, a greater distribution of profits to holders.
As for the percentages, in my opinion, tax on sales must always be higher than on buys, we cannot penalize those who are investing in the project, so the “symbolic” 1% seems quite reasonable to me


I agree with this. It’s good with me to give up redistribution and send to SLP. Actually, I prefer it.

I think it’s important we capture Something from buys and send to SLP. 1% makes sense. Additionally people in the crypto / def space tend to expect to pay tax on buys. So, 1% isn’t bad. My concern would be with people outside the def space, many might not be used to paying tax on buys. However, 1% is a low enough number I don’t think the adverse reaction would be too bad. Also, If they buy on the CEX I don’t believe they will pay tax, right? However, if they buy that route I believe they will have to pay fees which goes into the BSL ecosystem anyway, so that’s a win.

I suppose for me, I’m trying to weigh the cost-benefits of a very small buy tax compared to it being 0. I’m not worried about people in the def space paying tax. In fact, recently buy and sell taxes have ballooned to be 10% and above in a lot of projects. So, ours will be small relatively.

In summary, I agree with sending distributions to the SLP. I like the idea of a 1% buy tax a lot, but I’m just concerned if that could provide a barrier to new and potentially big buyers outside the DEFI space. If they are likely to use the CEX anyway, and that has no tax, then we would be alright.

Curious to hear everyone’s thoughts!


In my experience, no matter what you buy, stocks, bonds, etf, whatever, there is a cost of doing so, it’s just not called tax, but “we exist, so pay up, B…” fee.
Especially if you invest lower amounts, 1% might even be considered cheap.
Additionally, if you buy anything, usually the brokers, or the corporation that handles the etf does take a continuous chunk of your investment, which is not true for crypto.

That’s why I think that a 1% one off buy fee (tax) is completely reasonable, and I don’t think it would scare away people. If they know what’s what, they know it’s a super low fee. If they don’t, then they are probably not whales, so 1% might simply go beyond the radar.

1 Like

I have no problems with this proposal.
A 1 to2 % buy-in tax is very reasonable and negligible or even cheap to most buyers (traditional investors and crypto)
I am all in for getting rid of the redistribution too and allocating the entire sales tax to the SLP.

I think we have should have a balance of buy and sell tax. So maybe 3-4% for each. When I look at as an investor anything more then that is a turn off. I would not care about 3-4% on buy and sell that seems reasonable but when I see something get above 7-8% or more like some projects have some crazy amount I am turned off. So maybe something like 1% on buys and sells goes to reflections and then 2-3% on each buy/sell go to SLP. I would even be for maybe .5 - 1% of interest on the SLP going back into the SLP. I wonder if there will be more ways to fund the SLP down the road as well.


Why do you think we should keep the reflections?

Hmm - I am on the fence with the reflections. I like it because it gives a sort of dividend to holders and might provide some more incentive to purchase and hold for newbies. Cons - doesn’t really add much until a lot more volume starts happening and can take away from the SLP. More to SLP and and lower overall taxes for buy and sell might be better overall for the biz. Once SLP staking, debit card rewards/staking start probably don’t need anymore. Reflections sort of come out of the meme and shitcoins of last year - who could give better reflections - we are legit business and probably don’t need anymore once utility is rolled out and opportunities to earn. I do think we need buy tax and lower sell tax though.


I like a 3% buy and a 3 or 4% sell tax. I believe this tax is good while $BSL is young. We are still building, not just utility, were building the SLP… I am kinda biased too as I have bought BSL to hold/stake. If traders want to make money by our ascension they can tip the house :wink:

1 Like

Yeah, it’s a hard one, but I think the benefits of more money pouring into the SLP outweigh the benefits of reflections. Especially for long term holders.

1 Like

Would removing redistributions let us be considered for exchanges such as Coinbase?

1 Like

I don’t think it matters tbh, centralised exchanges doesn’t adhere to the tokenomics anyways.

1 Like

Would have been an interesting aspect to consider.