Background:
The TrueFi lending pool currently holds 143,750 TUSD in claimable fees earned by the protocol. These fees come from the 0.25% origination fee collected on each of the loans issued through v1 of the protocol (57.5mm TUSD x 0.25% = 143,750 TUSD).
In v2 of the protocol, these fees go to TRU stakers as described here. For these fees earned in v1, it’s up to governance to decide what to do with the fees.
Idea:
The lending pool could deposit 143,750 TUSD in claimable fees into a wallet designated as the TrueFi community treasury fund. This deposit would create the community treasury, in which TrustToken has announced it will contribute 10% of company tokens from Unlock #1.
Governance could then choose how to deploy these funds. Community discussions have proposed putting these funds into the TrueFi lending pool to earn interest and/or to move these funds into the SAFU at a later date after the SAFU has been established.
Signal:
Please give your feedback by voting and commenting below.
Do you support moving 143,750 TUSD in v1 claimable fees to community treasury?
Yes, start the community treasury fund with these fees
No, do something else with the fees (leave a comment below)
I like this in theory, but what do the details actually look like? e.g. this “wallet designated as the TrueFi community treasury fund”, is it a smart contract (in which case what will it look like and who will write it?), or is it a user wallet (in which case it’s presumably controlled by TrustToken LLC, at which point how is this any different than what we already have?)
Open to ideas here but today, I think it should be a user wallet controlled by the company so that we can get it up and running w/o much dev work. Over time, I’d like to see treasury smart contracts managed by protocol governance (@ryan.rodenbaugh just shared this in the SAFU thread) but I don’t think we have resources to build that near term on the roadmap.
I think this idea is still something new though, right? No real community treasury exists today – just the claimable fees sitting idle in the pool. I think setting up a clearly labeled wallet will make organization and transparency better as the community decides whether to deposit and farm funds, etc.
Yeah, I guess it would be nice to have community funds in a separate, clearly labeled address, even if that address is still company controlled. And I think the overhead for them (gas fees and complexity) would be acceptably small, but they should probably weigh in on that part.
Of course I’m still far less interested in what address the 144k TUSD is in, compared to my desire that it be immediately converted into tfTUSD So my vote of no should not be read as being against creating a fund address, but rather that I would greatly prefer 144k worth of tfTUSD deposited in this new address instead of TUSD. EDIT: eh, I’ll call it a yes. But still take this into account please
Once there’s community agreement for putting the ~144k TUSD fees into the community fund, then I’ll also be advocating for moving that TUSD into tfTUSD
I support both the proposal to move the v1 earned fees to a community fund and putting those funds into the lending pool. Thanks @tylerw and @benjamincosman for advocating to put these funds to use.
So my vote of no should not be read as being against creating a fund address, but rather that I would greatly prefer 144k worth of tfTUSD deposited in this new address instead of TUSD. EDIT: eh, I’ll call it a yes. But still take this into account please 
