Who here agrees?

“Tax exemption” aka “whitelisted from paying tax”

This feature is built ONLY for on-chain smart contracts/dapps that are worthy of it.

NOT for exchanges and top holders!

In my opinion the community has to decide on a “on case basis”. Take the whitelisting of binance internal wallets for example: I think it is a really good deal for us at the moment because the binance support (i.e. the monthly burn, but also the psychological support) is crucial. Working out similar “deals” with other exchanges would be good, but unfortunately I dont see it happening at the moment.

Burn would be the same if we tax the “exempted wallet’s”.

It would be automated instead of a manual burn from Binance… so, what is the benefit of “exempting” them from tax exactly?

Are we worried they might (de list) ? I believe that won’t happen, given the fact that they hold the largest bag… they won’t harm themselves, that’s obvious.

Since “tax exemption” and “whitelisting”… I’ve noticed 2 clear problems we face…

  1. People worrying about “off-chain” supply.
  2. People holding on exchanges rather than on-chain avoiding paying a 0.2%-0.5% tax on a transaction

This “tax exemption” has hurt the chain rather than helped it…

There is no way that a little bit of cold to hot wallet shuffling is equal to the voluntary burns of gains of exchange trading (which is traded offchain and cannot be taxed anyways)

It appears to be a good deal. If you have some actual facts about your statement, then you are welcome to share. If not, then I assume you just made it up. You are claiming that binance cold to hot wallet shuffels could amount to >50% of all burns. VERY unlikely.

So we reward those who ( choose ) to burn… by “exempting” them from paying tax ?

Shouldn’t it be tax all, and whoever chooses to burn does so…

All in all, my point from this post is that “tax exemption” should strictly be for on-chain dapps/smart contracts not exchanges.

1 Like