Governance on Staking Rewards Tax Spending

Proposals Staking
#1

The idea came to me from a proposal on reddit . We should go one step further from the topic of this proposal. There should be a new token provided from staking rewards, and this token should allow governance over a percentage of the staking rewards. This token can be used for the community to propose and vote on anything that can improve the zil ecosystem.

An idea of what this token should do is that we can vote on hiring software development companies that will build zil specific DApps. The community can then poll on what DApp they would like to see first.

Another example would be to hire more UI/X developers to make the zil ecosystem more inviting. The theme looks like from an old movie with the programmer hacking away at the keyboard.

We can possibly allow gzil to govern the tax on the staking rewards. We should possibly set a cap on the tax, so it does not become unfair to one group. We can also consider a flexible tax amount? I guess we can consider this as a form of income tax used by local governments. For now I am going to call this token ZTC (Zilliqa Tax Coin).

#3

I would vote no on this. I believe the proposed new token is what the gzil token should be used for.

4 Likes
#4

I would vote no too - this can be handled by gZil. Extra complexity is not needed.

3 Likes
#5

More importantly still - this will diminish the value of gZil.

3 Likes
#6

I created a reddit thread where we can go more in-depth on this. In no way shape or form would I like to take away utility of gZIL. Though I want to start a discussion about creating an investment DAO.

#7

I agree, this will be a distraction, we need to better use Gzil for this and many other new ideas we need to implement, no need to come up with a new token for every new Tax, voting or system we want to develop, we right now have the power to vote for DApps if we want using the Gzil tokens, let’s focus on what we already have and its working fine, and work it from there, if we try to open and diversify we will end up with a network that nobody will understand.

1 Like
#8

I wanted to create a fair system for anyone who did not jump onto zil before the distribution finished. But I understand what you are trying to say. I wanted everyone who is staking in ZIL from now to the future to be able to decide how the funds are spent.

#9

I also wanted to incentivize more people in the staking pool. I think there should be other channels to allow the community to have a say in the growth of zil.

#10

I understand, but in my opinion, in the future, people that want to participate on the network will need to buy Gzil and that will increase its value, and will allow anyone to participate on the network. if we need funds for marketing and upgrades we can all vote to allocate a portion of the stacking rewards towards those needs, without needing to create additional tokens, that is just my opinion.

1 Like
#11

Then what about a system to streamline voting on funding. I know we have the governance portal. I think as a community we need to be more proactive on this. Also how will we incentivize more people to stake? I mean one example would be to scrap the tax token all together while retaining the tax. We can then just keep track of those who stake and provide these wallets with the ico of such DApp.

#12

We already have a governance token that can drive the Zilliqa ecosystem.
If we need a new feature, we can give it a feature to the current gZil.
I think issuing additional governance tokens is no different from issuing meaningless currency in the central financial sector.

2 Likes
#13

What about the other proposal that was mentioned above your post?

#14

What bothers me is that people voted to do it. Invalid or not, that is disturbing that if it was done properly, we would have had to pay a tax on our staking!?
That’s utter horseshit! What do we want, a government that wants to tax our income? So if it were to eventually go through would we be able to claim it within zil like a tax return!? NOPE!!

There needs to be some parameters on what can be proposed. Like a proposal that stupid ass tax ideas are not allowed to be proposed…!!!

1 Like
#15

Delegators must have the option to choose whether they want to participate or not while still being able to stake. Essentially freedom to enter and get out anytime without unstaking. Also as everyone stated, gZIL will do the job

#16

Honestly that make sense instead of being forced to get more taken out from staking. Then they are locked in and later converted to ico. But lets see what happens with this grant dao.

#17

I vote no. A lot of good reasons in the previous comments.

#18

I vote no. For the same reasons most have already specified. We have gZIL

#19

Voting No for this. We already have gZil. We just need to utilize it.