To my understanding, USDT and other tokens are on the way to be integrated to the bridge. However there will be a problem with the current settings: the NoM > other chains tx is taxed heavily VS other bridge and therefore this could prevent us for getting TVL and liquidity on the NoM.
I’d like to open the discussion about this issue. If I’m willing to trade 300k USDT on the NoM, the fee for getting out on such a massive amount will be a turn off.
I’d suggest us to align with other bridges for other tokens and keep the high tax for ZNN and QSR for now.
All this will achieve is reduce transaction velocity of znn & qsr. Only governments who artificially try to prevent devaluation of their currencies impose taxes on converting their national currency to another. Lets not make that same mistake. Lets rather focus on creating organic demand than introducing artificial restrictions.
I was carefully conservative in my initial post but you’re right, the taxe is a non sense if we seek for liquidity as liquidity as to go through TVL. The fee we’d generate on swap with high TVL and deep liquidity would be way more interesting than even a 10% fee on our 400k TVL and the 5k per week going through the bridge.
Feeless / apparently “free” / non transactional value orientation
This is an extremely simple narrative that communicates on every level that the builders have a value proposition that is broad, deep, and far reaching. Outside of crypto, projects and companies that dominate often do not have any acutely transactional basis for delivering and capturing value.
Would this fee be collected toward the perpetual marketing accelerator?
or would it be a tax in both directions of the bridge?
I think the wZNN tax marketing fund is a bit different because it is to some extent taxing emissions.
As such, the current bridge tax has unique characteristics which may not apply to USDT, and thus the presumption of a tax should not be carried over, without consideration from square one.