You can check for yourself its status in the following GitHub repos 
:
1 Like
i support the forumand the proposalis good
Hi TFL, Thanks for reviewing and merging the finder changes promptly. Please review and merge the station and station-extension changes to help bring LUNC back.
1 Like
Mabe we should put the proposal up for voting and start burning after 7 days governance .
Then TFL sees if this passes then they update station
Please correct me if I am wrong @ek826.
I think the issue with that approach is that Parameter Change proposal gets implemented automatically without any manual intervention. So if there is a delay in merging pull request it may cause issues with Terra Station once the tax is in. But if workable that is a good idea based on the feedback from TFL.
Eager to hear back from TFL on this.
1 Like
Want to repeg without funds to collateralise in a period which governments push for CBDC and massive stablecoin regulation? Take care of LUNC and forget that peg, algostable itās insane. Maybe something good in Ethereum RAI stablecoin with negative interestsā¦ but not in a UST pegged by nothing. Pegged means funds - enough FIAT or BTC not good in this moment due to volatility - etc apart from the marketcap itself.
About CEX:
Gate.io already announced that they will not going to do any burn for trading off-chain transactions. Gate.io Announcement Regarding the Terra Classicās 1.2% Tax Proposal
Exchanges are different.
"As an exchange, the trading of LUNC and USTC are not on-chain activities and will not be charged the tax. If you want to avoid the potential on-chain tax on deposits, it is highly recommended that you should deposit LUNC and USTC on Gate.io before September 12. "
1 Like
Kucoin is going to do the 1.2% tax burn should the proposal pass! That is 30% currently of the inflow of LUNC alone 
5 Likes
For exchanges that decline to tax lunc we can make taxes or something like that. We can just create blacklist for their wallets.
4 Likes
Any news on this at all? Seems like discussions on github have stalled, but i assume there are additional talks happening behind closed doors? Really appreciate your contribution here, just wanted to poke around for some more info, I think a lot of people are anxiously waiting for this.
2 Likes
Am afraid I have taken a step back in direct discussions since the re-democratization of the chain was achieved, so I donāt have any more information to offer 
; I would think someone from our community (LCC) is pushing this forward on the back end, alongside the TR, DSD, and other communities. For the time being, am content being involved with direct governance matters through Agora and the official code deployment channels.
There is a plan B if the merge does not go through (donāt see why wouldnāt though), and also, we can always remind them once this parameter proposal comes to vote and reach +70% voting power in the first few days if not hours
Resistance is futile 
4 Likes
Sir Kim . Great work. w think Bianance will support it. The Tax mechanism should continue till 21000000 (21 million) equal to that of bitcoin. We believe that BTC is the mother of blockchains but there LUNC has so many use casesā¦we want to see LUNC at the Top
I think the general consensus from this post and other discussions being had in different places, is that we go ahead with the 1.2% parameter proposal as is. There are some other good ideas related to the voting power and redistribution of taxes that should have their own discussion. The 1.2 parameter tax will be under continuous evaluation so the community can adapt accordingly.
10 Likes
This makes sense, thanks.
Given the state of the applications, a parameter change proposal will be created on or before September 10th. If the tax and burn should pass, the target activation epoch is 94 (block height 9,475,200) , on or around September 20th.
2 Likes
Canāt thank you enough for the efforts you are putting in Terra Rebels. Thank you @ek826 and Alex for the detailed analysis and potential path to recovery!!!
just an FYI, there is a slight adjustment to the tax cap that needs to be made. Since uluna is not a registered denom that is usually taxed, it will follow SDRās tax cap (as per the code),
// if no tax-cap registered, return SDR tax-cap
return k.TaxPolicy(ctx).Cap.Amount
Thus, the cap amount should be set to 60,000,000,000.000000 e.g. 60billion luna. This would cover the entire 6.9 Trillion supply.
4 Likes
@ek826
The is not enough cheese for the whine about devs working for free, so letās cut through the bureaucracy and bullsh*t, and please post a terra address for the community to drop some coin for the LUNC devs. Please be so kind to start an official post [for safety reasons] with the address here on classic-agora. Itās ad-hoc, but will work until something is official.
Iām absolutely certain the LUNC community will rally to the cause! At least weāll all know where the money is going, in alignment with our interests, and not going to a TFL black hole. Iāll be one of the first to contribute.
@dfunk if you are still around, please remind the lunatics that the previously passed PR 4080 had the intention of a 10% stipend for the Classic ecosystem developers.
Thanks everyone in advance for their support, contributions, and unwavering dedication!
7 Likes
Please take the training wheels off classic! We are past the cockroach point. We have work to do, and the slow-roll wonāt work anymore. Either this policy changes or we petition for a site move.
4 Likes
Why couldnāt the burn eventually be capped once we reached a more reasonable supply if the worry is the burning could eventually drive developers and users to other chains where there is no tax ? Once we eventually hit a certain number in the future turn the burn rate back to zero .
Get with the program. This is old FUD. MEXC already is proving the point with posting their burn numbers. https://support.mexc.com/hc/en-001/articles/10170757045913
Donāt bring a knife to a gun fight.
1 Like