Recently experimented with a token deployment feature, implementing a 10% tax structure inspired by proven DeFi models. The distribution breaks down as follows: 5% allocated to token burn mechanism, reducing total supply over time; the remaining 5% directed to a marketing and buyback wallet for ecosystem development. To be clear—this was strictly a test deployment with no public promotion or purchase recommendations. The goal was simply exploring how tax-based tokenomics work in practice, particularly examining burn mechanics and fund allocation strategies that support long-term token sustainability.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 9
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
SnapshotDayLaborervip
· 01-11 13:07
I understand the burn mechanism, but how can we ensure that the 5% marketing wallet is truly used for the ecosystem?
View OriginalReply0
HashBanditvip
· 01-11 12:15
yo tax structures hitting different when you actually run the math... back in my mining days we didn't have this luxury, just pure hashrate or bust lol. ngl the 5/5 split seems mid but hey, at least someone's thinking about supply mechanics instead of just yeet-and-dump tokenomics 🤔
Reply0
GweiTooHighvip
· 01-10 19:59
I've seen this burn mechanism trick quite a few times, but the question is whether 5% of the return flow is enough to support the price...
View OriginalReply0
HashRatePhilosophervip
· 01-10 19:59
The token burning mechanism needs to be carefully considered, but the 5% marketing wallet seems easily suspected of cutting the leeks.
View OriginalReply0
FunGibleTomvip
· 01-10 19:57
The token burning mechanism is really awesome. I'm just curious about how that 5% marketing wallet is actually spent.
View OriginalReply0
BloodInStreetsvip
· 01-10 19:56
The 10% tax structure, to put it simply, is still the same old trick, a combination of burning tokens and buybacks... It sounds quite credible, but that's exactly why I never believe the "just a test" excuse.
View OriginalReply0
GasOptimizervip
· 01-10 19:56
10% tax fee structure? 5:5 distribution? Calculated, the capital efficiency is indeed good, the burn mechanism reduces inflation pressure, and the other half is used for buyback to maintain the price... the optimal solution on paper.
View OriginalReply0
NftRegretMachinevip
· 01-10 19:34
This tax rate design is a bit standard, the old routine of burn + marketing... Is it really just a test?
View OriginalReply0
MrDecodervip
· 01-10 19:32
Just a test deployment, don't overthink it.
View OriginalReply0
View More
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)