Luna classic mandatory burn

It seems that after the initial euphoria of Binance burning weekly and the advent of other hyped events that the direction of Luna Classic is somewhat rudderless, and clearly from a price view point, is lacking in support from the wider community.

There has been endless talk about mass burns to reduce supply.
Many months have passed, and online surveys have supported a mandatory burn event, and yet we have not coordinated one.

I propose that we ask the community to vote on this idea to allow their holdings to be taxed 10% by way of a single transaction initially, and then a recurring annual tax of 5% of holdings until we have reached the 10 Billion figure desired.

Any sale of coins should carry a tax of 20% in the first year from the onset of the initial tax.

Currently it is estimated that it will take 51 years to reach the golden target.

The above would reduce that number drastically and be an acid test of whether intent by the community is genuine.

This above would mean that the supply would fall and the price rise without the demands of new capital and a percentage of those tax burns to be agreed to fund the pool of development clearly needed.

If we truly wish to be an independent force we must act in a commercial way that will win the day.

Can we please get support for such a proposal to see just how committed this community is to the project.

Finally for transparency the above would cost me tens of millions on day one of which I would happily support because I know the upside is greater than the sacrifice.


1 Like

I have said it before: If the “community” would put enough pressure on the exchanges the 1.2% burn tax would have been implemented a long time ago. There are ways and methods this could be achieved with but it won’t happen unfortunately…

God no… Can we not focus on burns, can we actually get the internals up IBC, Rebel Station, get products on chain and stop scaring investors away with ridiculous burn props, like every week its one step forward two steps back…


I just made an account to tell you how insane this is. Words can’t describe how pissed i am.

Let me try to be calm and respectful:

1: we don’t touch eachother’s funds
2: 20% sale tax, not even safeshitcoin inu has this ponzinomic
3: lets say we reach 10 billion supply, you will have like 1% of your coins left, so even if price goes x100, you still have the EXACT SAME in dollar amount. It is pointless.


We are now minting coins rather than reducing them. Only by staking have we reduced circulation supply. WE had a 1.2% tax burn reduced to 0.2%. There is no current burn proposal that will get the circulation down at an attractive rate. Unless there is a coordinated approach LUNC will end up in the same position it was in May.

Seems a quorum of people are benefitting here whilst the coin holders are watching our value diminish.

1 Like

Minting coins we burn in a week to pay the devs, kind of need devs to work on the block chain to bring utility, we did have a 1.2% tax, and it was given 17 days before it was reduced because there was no volume there as there was no utility, IBC wasn’t enabled, TR had just started recovering and building up from the ashes of the fall out.

Its not a change over night, its not a 6 month fix, you don’t just rebuild an eco system overnight, 6 months, 12 months, it takes time, and your not giving it time, and I think this is the problem with everyone that questions the burn, get utility on the chain, then the tax will work.

Its just ridiculous and not a well thought out plan as you just haven’t seen the risk mitigation, you just hurt the stakers, the validators, the holders and first time investors, do I want to invest in something I’m going to get taxed on at 30% when I first invest into LUNC (20% first year tax + 10% tax of my initial bag I just bought), do I want to hold for a year and get taxed a further 5%, then the .2% tax on chain transactions, that is a lot of taxes.

Get the chain up and running with utility, stop screwing with the tax, take a deep breath, the tax is not going to do anything without utility.

This is not a charity it is peoples hard earned capital investing into some sort of belief that it will be managed and create a return.
The initial tax assumed no new investment as it was levied against existing wallet holders. Furthermore the staking returns being offered will more than swallow the tax cost, as would the subsequent years.
The only reason I can see the price is not lower today is the fact the circulating supply has been reduced by staking which in itself carries a cost with most validators.
That is understandable as we all need to make a living.
However it appears that the coin holders seem to be carrying the load here and if we can reduce the supply by taxing and staking we create a bigger market cap and increase the price.

If that price increases by 10% it has covered the tax.
So the only ones that would not support this proposal are those feeding off the gross circulating supply rather than the coin holders who are being depleted of their capital as far as I can see.

Price has gone from ATH in September @59300 to 14000. A drop in 3 months of circa 77%. Clearly the current thinking is not gaining traction rightly or wrongly.

By leveraging a sales tax it deterred sales and let us face it the Luna airdrop has restrictions that have likely kept its price higher than it would ordinarily be today.

More tax, more burn.

Higher market cap, higher coin price.

I want every holder to be a winner not a small number of facilitators.

I don’t think your getting it, when LUNC fell from ATH in September @59300 to 14000 there was no utility on the chain, all your seeing is a tax (no matter what value you set the tax to) isn’t working because there isn’t the volume to make it viable, utility brings volume, additional taxes are just going to drive people away.

The premise of wealth was floated on the Burns which I have followed painstakingly. Taxes sustain jurisdictions and self taxing would generate increasing prices rather than a slow death at this rate. Price is a gain below 14000 today. Utility can only be achieved if you have a viable business plan and right now that needs to be a balance of taxes, staking & Utility otherwise mine and everyone elses capital that is funding the few will disappear.

Thank you for your answer,
I think the same as you on this proposal,
we don’t let this bullshit get approved!

1 Like

There have been other versions of this proposal, to reduce the total number of coins by taxing everyone or a reverse split etc. I do not support this approach as I believe it will result in a large sell off and disbanding of the community and ultimately the death of lunc. Who would invest in something that is immediately subject to such huge taxes?
It may well generate an increase in price over time but not an increase in wealth. It will not increase market cap and because of the ugly fundamentals it will likely see a reduction in market cap.
The fact that you believe the 13% staked coins is supporting the current price shows how misguided you are and this is not a smart proposal.

1 Like