Stash out Tax (no double tax)

First, if you read the title and are ready to rip into me about being double taxed please stop, take a deep breath, and relax. This is easy to address. If you really care about breeding there is really good potential in this idea.

Stash out tax, a big one. Let’s not get too fixated on the number too soon, explore some ideas with me first.

Double tax. This is really simple. Just for an example with easy numbers lets say the tax is 50%, adjust breeding costs to half (50%) of what they currently are. 50 RBW to breed becomes 25.

Ok, double tax solved. But that does create another situation, breeding is now 50% cheaper if you buy RBW and stash in. But is that really so bad? People buying RBW sounds rather good. And 50% is rather high for a tax, remember we used that number to make examples easy to understand.

Ok, things are getting a bit complicated. Why go through this?

Incentives. Reward desired behaviors and do whatever the opposite of reward is to whatever the opposite of desired is.

Take a few deep breaths, maybe reread the above and think about it for a bit.

Ok, great, put those thoughts aside for a moment.

Let’s chat about ‘exit liquidity’ for a bit.

ROI (Return On Investment) Bros need a way to ‘cash out’, right now that seems to be RBW and UNIM.

Another way to cash out is to sell Unicorns or Keystones. But nobody is really doing that right now because they cost more to make then you can sell for and require more effort from the player.

Question time. Does the game / community need lower RBW and UNIM prices or more Unicorns and Keystones listed for sale?

Right now the incentives are set up for lower RBW and UNIM, less listings.

Stash out tax has the potential to reverse this.

I know of at least one project doing really well with a 30% withdrawal tax. They don’t have the added complexity of needing their token on chain to mint but I think we can work around that.

Let’s say giving people stashing in a discount on breeding isn’t acceptable. The game server knows how much you have stashed out and when you breed or evolve. Should not be too hard to implement a tax refund equal to the taxable amount of the breeding or evolution costs. But now we are not incentivizing buying RBW and stashing in, and it is more work for the developers.

Wow, all that about the double tax ‘issue’.

Let’s talk about the tax itself.

For now let’s think in terms of 30%.

Anyone like the idea of a ‘flat tax’ in real life? Me neither.

How about incentivizing certain activities?

What if one or more things give a tax discount? That game I was referencing cuts the tax in half for LP providers. Hmmm.

What if certain badges gave you a bit of a tax break? What if the LG IRS department gave different tax breaks for different badges depending on what, and for how long they wanted to incentivize. And it changed as needed?

There is some really interesting meta in this set of ideas. I encourage people to offer improvements where possible and only bring up downsides if they truly invalidate the concept, as in the downside is worse than the upside. Lets not throw out the Baby Corn with the bath water.

1 Like

I have absolutely no idea what you are getting at.
One big problem with stashing at the moment is that we earn UNIM in game (stashed = off-chain) but must stash out to make if on-chain to breed or evolve. I do not like the idea of being taxed for breeding and evolving so I don’t see how your idea could work, even if it made sense which at the moment it does not.
No no tax please!

Not sure what to say. I offered two solutions for people that are actually breeding.

Did you not understand the part about lowering breeding costs?

Or the other option of giving breeders a tax refund?

I don’t really understand any of it. Sorry.

I gotta be honest OP, you made this VERY confusing with all the extra fluff you wrote. If you were to re write this and outline exactly what your proposing, it would make more sense.

While I get what your trying to do, with all of the “just breathe” quips, a bulleted list with concise suggestions would allow for a better discussion.

Also, without getting into the weeds and seeds of your proposal, I will I’ll say from a developer perspective, the suggestion your making about a refund or a discount would require a significant amount of code not currently built into the CU contracts/game.

The developers codeed themselves into this corner by requiring unim and rbw be on chain.

I remember reading or hearing something about why they did that but can’t find it now.

The truly simple option is not requiring unim and rbw to be on chain.

Other projects are doing so and this is giving them more flexibility when it comes to withdraw fees or taxes.

As far as rewriting the post would love to see how you would present it. Even with no double tax in the title the first complaint was about being double taxed.

So many people seem to have gut reaction to the idea of a tax. Even if it ultimately supports players interested in the game.

Seems like some would prefer to cash out as much as possible with zero regard of the long-term success of the system as long as they can maximize returns today. Even when future returns with a tax could be much higher.

OP, I have no idea what double tax your referring to, and I don’t see the first guy mention anything other than not liking the idea of being taxed for breeding.

Give us your idea. Stop worrying about writing it in a way that it doesn’t sound like a tax, if that’s what your proposing. Your writing a ton of words, but they dont have any guts.

Just give some facts, in regards to what method your proposing to tax/credit breeding or withdrawals or whatever it is you were trying to get at (still unclear).

Don’t worry about initial perception, just give us good facts, and if it has legs we can run with it!

Also, yes, unim and rbw are on chain. I love that they are tbh. That is a fact, no need to bash it.

This topic was automatically closed 5 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.