* THIS IS JUST AN IDEA *
I’ve been thinking a lot recently about the Contribution Proposal System (CPS) and its role in the ICON ecosystem over the long-term. Two key points that ICON is focusing on for the success of our network are “Decentralization” and “Sustainability”.
I believe that the CPS addresses both focal points, and that ICON has all the pieces necessary to be a successful ecosystem for many years to come.
High-level goal of the CPS
From a high-level, I see the CPS as ICON’s “Decentralized Growth Engine”. Even without the involvement of the ICON Foundation, internal and external teams alike can receive funding for their projects if there is a perceived benefit to either the ICON or ICE networks. This decentralized decision removes central bias and favoritism for grants.
Once BTP and IISS 3.1 are live, the CPS is well positioned to become this Decentralized Growth Engine for ICON. The CPS provides an opportunity for our ecosystem to be self-sustaining over the long term, which will allow us to grow both through bull markets as well as bear markets.
As a Decentralized Growth Engine, the CPS could be used to build infrastructure, build new applications, incentivize existing applications, incentivize BTP use cases, entice new developers and fund community-led marketing initiatives.
How CPS tokenomics previously worked
Previously, the CPS received all its funding through ICON Foundation node rewards. This was a centralized process, where the ICON Foundation claimed iSCORE and sent the funds directly to the CPS Treasury SCORE. iSCORE was claimed by the Foundation when the CPS Treasury balance ran low, which had been around every 2 months.
There previously was a “max cap” for the CPS Treasury SCORE of 1,000,000 ICX. “Max cap” means the maximum quantity of the token that can be held in the Treasury SCORE. If this max cap is reached, excess inflow of ICX would be sent to a separate smart contract to burn the tokens.
During this iteration, proposals were funded in ICX. This posed an issue when market conditions were volatile, as teams receiving funding had to try and estimate their proposal around market conditions. If ICX price dropped below the market price of ICX when the proposal was submitted, often teams were short on funding and had to create a “Budget Adjustment Request” to receive additional funding.
With the previous rewards system and delegation numbers, this equated to around 1,650 ICX/day ($2,475/day) or around 50,000 ICX/month ($75,000/month).
Example Flow
(Centralized Process)
ICON Foundation claims iSCORE → ICX claimed is sent to CPS Treasury
-
if ICX balance = 1,000,000
- Excess ICX is burnt
How CPS tokenomics will work after IISS 3.1 and BTP
Now that ICON 2.0 is launched, network proposals will be periodically made to adopt IISS 3.1. ICON 2.0 also allows for Java SCOREs, which enables our flagship product “BTP” to be deployed. IISS 3.1 and BTP introduce a new era for CPS funding as well. 10% of all ICON 2.0 inflation is allocated to the CPS Treasury SCORE, similar to how ICX stakers are allocated their daily iSCORE rewards for voting on our network. The current BTP model accounts for a 0.2% fee for every BTP transaction performed, with fees collected in the BTP Fee Aggregator. These fees are auctioned to ICX holders at a discount, and the ICX used to purchase these discounted assets are sent to the CPS Treasury SCORE. Both “income streams” are decentralized processes, with ICON 2.0 inflation being a static inflow while BTP fees are a dynamic inflow.
With the release of ICON 2.0, we are also upgrading the CPS to introduce our “bnUSD” treasury along with other minor improvements. The bnUSD treasury is important because it allows for projects to receive stable funding (bnUSD), rather than being subject to market conditions due to receiving a volatile asset (ICX).
Since inflows to the CPS Treasury SCORE are still ICX, a swapping mechanism is needed to convert the ICX inflows into bnUSD. This swapping occurs through the Balanced DEX, where ICX is first swapped to sICX, and then sICX is swapped for bnUSD. These transactions are triggered through transactions on the CPS such as: submitting a Proposal, submitting a Progress Report, voting on a Proposal, voting on a Progress Report.
An additional max cap of 200,000 bnUSD is now introduced for the bnUSD portion of the CPS Treasury, while the ICX max cap is changed from 1,000,000 ICX to 200,000 ICX. How this works is ICX flows into the CPS Treasury and is swapped to bnUSD until the bnUSD treasury reaches 200,000 bnUSD. Once the bnUSD max cap is reached, ICX begins to accumulate in the CPS Treasury until the ICX max cap is reached. Once both max caps are reached, the excess inflow of ICX is sent to a separate smart contract to burn the ICX.
All proposals are now funded in bnUSD. Teams looking to submit a proposal will need to estimate their costs in bnUSD and will receive stable funding if their proposal is accepted.
There are now three different inflows to the CPS Treasury that we need to estimate: ICON Foundation node rewards, 10% ICON 2.0 inflation and BTP Fees.
- ICON Foundation node rewards: With the new rewards system and rough delegation numbers, this equates to around 1,000 ICX/day ($1,500/day) or around 30,000 ICX/month ($45,000/month).
- 10% ICON 2.0 inflation: With an estimated monthly ICX inflation of 3,000,000 ICX, 10% equates to 300,000 ICX/month ($450,000/month).
- BTP Fees: It is very difficult to estimate BTP Fees, so the best we can do is use comparative analysis to make a rough guess as to what volume will be and then multiply by the fee percentage. Based on (rough) current monthly volume numbers for cross-chain bridges in the industry, BTP could do something like 150,000,000 ICX/month volume. 150,000,000 * 0.002 = 300,000 ICX/month ($450,000 ICX/month).
Example Flow
(Centralized Process)
ICON Foundation claims iSCORE → ICX claimed is sent to CPS Treasury
(Decentralized Process)
ICX is minted through daily ICX Inflation → ICX sent to CPS Treasury
(Decentralized Process)
BTP transaction occurs → BTP fee sent to BTP Fee Aggregator → ICX is used to purchase discounted asset → spent ICX is sent to CPS Treasury
-
if bnUSD balance < 200,000:
- On Balanced DEX: ICX swapped for sICX → sICX swapped for bnUSD → bnUSD sent to CPS Treasury
-
elif bnUSD balance = 200,000:
-
ICX accumulates
-
if ICX balance = 200,000:
- Excess ICX is burnt
-
How I propose CPS tokenomics should work moving forward
I propose everything for “How CPS tokenomics will work after IISS 3.1 and BTP’’ above to remain the same, except for some changes to how the max caps for the bnUSD/ICX treasuries work. We create a minimum cap for the bnUSD treasury of 500,000 bnUSD, introduce a dynamic bnUSD max cap and remove a max cap to the ICX treasury.
A minimum cap for the bnUSD treasury will act as a parameter to guarantee the CPS always has adequate funding for prospective projects and development. ICX inflows will always be converted into bnUSD until the bnUSD treasury contains at least 500,000 bnUSD.
A dynamic maximum cap for the bnUSD treasury is introduced as a hedging mechanism for the CPS treasury. The maximum cap will always be 25% of the market value of the ICX treasury, unless that value is less than 500,000 bnUSD. This guarantees that our treasury takes advantage of ICX price appreciation during bull markets and is a hedging mechanism in the event of a market downturn.
No maximum cap for the ICX treasury will allow us to utilize the tokenomics introduced with IISS 3.1 and BTP to take advantage of funding that will incentivize the growth of the ICON ecosystem and our products.
Example Flow
(Centralized Process)
ICON Foundation claims iSCORE → ICX claimed is sent to CPS Treasury
(Decentralized Process)
ICX is minted through daily ICX Inflation → ICX sent to CPS Treasury
(Decentralized Process)
BTP transaction occurs → BTP fee sent to BTP Fee Aggregator → ICX is used to purchase discounted asset → ICX is sent to CPS Treasury
-
if bnUSD balance < 500,000:
- On Balanced DEX: ICX swapped for sICX → sICX swapped for bnUSD → bnUSD sent to CPS Treasury
-
elif bnUSD balance = 500,000:
- ICX accumulates
(Dynamic Max Cap Calculation)
- if ICX treasury market value > $500,000:
- bnUSD max cap = 25% ICX treasury market value
Table of Flow Comparison
Remember the above is just my estimation of numbers, but it is likely that burning excess CPS inflows will only make ICX less inflationary. Burning this ICX may have a psychological benefit to some users, however the burning would only be reducing inflation by 11%. Taking the ICX out of circulating supply is what really matters for the long term, and this can simply be done by storing the ICX in the CPS treasury (unless it is used to fund our network growth).
How the proposed model promotes long-term sustainability of ICON
I believe for ICON to be successful and sustainable over the long-term we need to accumulate funding in the CPS rather than automatically burning excess ICX inflows. Accumulation of funding in the CPS introduces “optionality” to the platform. By keeping funds in the CPS we now have “the option to burn or the option to invest". Optionality has a tangible financial benefit, and objectively speaking having more optionality is more valuable than less optionality. Plus, this gives the platform more flexibility whereas burning limits our funding options.
Additionally, all ICX inflows to the CPS are essentially removed from circulating supply until our network’s P-Reps decide to release them, and (hopefully) they are released for funding a project that will add a tangible benefit to the ICON or ICE ecosystems.
If the community feels that the treasury is getting too large, a proposal can be made to burn X # of ICX tokens. The key here is we are giving ourselves the option to use these funds for growth before we decide to burn.
ICON’s application layer and interoperability product are still in their early stages and could use additional funding to help cement the foundation we are trying to lay for the long term, so this is why I choose growth over deflation.
Here is how I believe additional funding to the CPS could be used to solidify ICON as a competitive blockchain over the long-term:
-
Incentivizing existing products on the application layer
a. While other projects are announcing incentive programs to port over popular applications and try to attract new capital to their blockchains, I believe we can do a more sustainable implementation of this concept. Applications like Balanced could apply for supplementary funding to an incentive program they announce for their product. For example, If Balanced announces a $1 million liquidity incentive program using their DAO Fund, they could request an additional 50% from the CPS treasury (500,000 bnUSD) to supplement their initiative.
b. How does this help ICON? It attracts new capital to our blockchain. New capital generates transactions, uses our products, contributes to our community, participates in grassroots marketing initiatives and provides buying pressure to the ICX token.
-
Incentivizing BTP adoption and use cases
a. It makes sense to use a portion of the CPS funds to incentivize our flagship product BTP, which also generates revenue for the CPS. By incentivizing BTP use cases, we increase the number of bridging transactions that take place, which increases the amount of fees generated and sent back to the CPS.
b. One example of how we could incentivize the adoption of BTP wrapped assets is by incentivizing liquidity on partner blockchains. This would occur by creating an application where users can stake their LP tokens containing predetermined BTP wrapped assets, and in return they receive a boost on the yield they receive for being a liquidity provider. This boost would come from the funds provided by the CPS. With increased liquidity of BTP wrapped assets on our partner chains, we can widely distribute our assets, build new use cases for these wrapped assets, lock liquidity allowing for arbitrage opportunities, and increase the number of bridging transactions.
-
Funding the development of additional applications on our application layer
a. Once Optimus and Equality are live, we will have all the fundamental pieces for a DeFi ecosystem in place on ICON. These products will allow for supplementary DeFi protocols to be built on top of them, increasing yield opportunities and asset utility on the ICON network. A thriving DeFi ecosystem will attract external capital and generate additional transactions on ICON.
b. Funding of the application layer doesn’t need to be confined to DeFi. It could also be used to support NFT creators/products and introduce more P2E games on our network. These applications are beneficial to ICON in similar ways as DeFi products are.
-
Infrastructure
a. High-quality developer tooling and documentation provides a seamless experience for new and existing developers to contribute to the ICON public blockchain. These types of things need grant funding from the CPS because they are open source and public goods.
-
Developers
a. We could use CPS funds to incentivize new developers to try out and join the ICON ecosystem. This could be done through affiliate programs for the CPS, well-funded hackathons, hiring contractors, or targeting developer conferences and communities.
-
Marketing
a. Community-led marketing initiatives could be funded through the CPS.
I just wanted to start this discussion within our community, so always open to feedback or alternative suggestions!