Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docs: update proposal and params for release v1.1.0 #125

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 19, 2023

Conversation

nghuyenthevinh2000
Copy link
Contributor

@nghuyenthevinh2000 nghuyenthevinh2000 commented Feb 16, 2023

I. Burn tax split to community pool

Summary

Previously, the community utilized the seigniorage RewardWeight parameter to remint a portion of the burned supply to the community pool. This was confusing to many people in the community. The third governance proposal is seeking consensus around the creation of a new parameter that does not utilize the seigniorage remint policy, but has an independent ability to directly send a percentage of the on-chain tax to the community pool. The initialization of this parameter will be 10% community pool, 90% burn as noted in governance proposal #11111, which was the consensus before the Binance requests to turn off seigniorage (and are being alternatively handled by feature #2).

Specs

Tests

  • TestSplitTax:

    • It will go through several burn tax split rate called %split_rate
    • It will deduct tax from user to FeeCollector (first check to see if FeeDecorator has the correct tax amount)
    • It will send the transaction to BurnTaxFeeDecorator
    • It will check if Community Pool has the amount of tax*%split_rate
    • It will check if Total Supply has less amount of tax*(1-%split_rate) than that in the beginning (since tax*(1-%split_rate) is burned)
    • It will check if FeeCollector has zero amount (since 100% tax is sent to Community pool and Burn)
  • BurnTaxSplit param gov change test:

    • It will setup a node
    • It will submit a param gov to change BurnTaxSplit
    • It will output BurnTaxSplit before and after gov
  • Upgrade check: Make sure that state migration in x/treasury module works

II. Burn tax exemption list

Summary

Binance has requested that the internal movement between Binance owned wallets be exempt from the burn tax (currently set to 0.2%). A list of Binance owned wallets has been provided to the community via the above announcement. It was confirmed with Binance that movement to and from Binance wallets will still be taxed. This means deposits and withdrawals are not exempt, but rather only the internal movements between wallets will be exempt for their internal security purposes. This first governance proposal is seeking consensus around this request from Binance. The implementation of this whitelist feature will be parameterized, with the initial list set to the provided Binance list. Thus, if this feature is accepted to be adopted, future changes to this whitelist can be controlled by the community in a governance parameter change proposal.

Specs

Tests

  • TestFilterRecipient:

    • Create Msgs for various case:
      • MsgSend(binance -> binance)
      • MsgSend(normal -> normal)
      • MsgSend(binance -> normal), MsgSend(binance -> binance)
      • MsgSend(binance -> binance), MsgMultiSend(binance -> normal, binance -> binance)
    • Send Msg to BurnTaxFeeDecorator
    • Check amount burn before and after
    • Check community pool before and after
    • Check FeeCollector before and after
  • Tax Exemption List gov change:

    • Create a node
    • Make a gov to add addresses to Tax Exemption List
    • Check if tax exemption list has those addresses
  • Upgrade check: Make sure that state migration in x/treasury module works and Binance addresses are added to Tax Exemption List

@nghuyenthevinh2000 nghuyenthevinh2000 marked this pull request as ready for review February 16, 2023 06:54
@nghuyenthevinh2000 nghuyenthevinh2000 changed the title docs: update proposal and params docs: update proposal and params for release v1.x Feb 16, 2023
@nghuyenthevinh2000 nghuyenthevinh2000 self-assigned this Feb 16, 2023
@nghuyenthevinh2000
Copy link
Contributor Author

@edk208 @inon-man @ZaradarBH @fragwuerdig

Can you have a look and comment on this one?

@edk208
Copy link
Contributor

edk208 commented Feb 16, 2023

beautiful thank you

@ZaradarBH ZaradarBH added enhancement New feature or request in scope Work approved by the community labels Feb 17, 2023
@ZaradarBH ZaradarBH added this to the Core - v1.1.0 milestone Feb 17, 2023
@inon-man inon-man changed the title docs: update proposal and params for release v1.x docs: update proposal and params for release v1.1.x Feb 18, 2023
@inon-man inon-man changed the title docs: update proposal and params for release v1.1.x docs: update proposal and params for release v1.1.0 Feb 18, 2023
@inon-man inon-man merged commit 5e27935 into main Feb 19, 2023
@inon-man inon-man deleted the v2.x/spec-update-1 branch February 19, 2023 13:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request in scope Work approved by the community
Projects
No open projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants