CIP ? - Treasury fraction on actual distributed rewards

Hello, recently I started a conversation on Cardano Forum about the opportunity to change the protocol with regard to the calculation of the fraction of reward pot that goes to treasury.
One of my two proposal is to calculate it on the actual paid rewards instead on the epoch reward pot in order to increase the transparency and avoid a kind of “double taxation” applied to unclaimed rewards that go back to the reserve.
Here the link to my original post: Double treasury taxation of 40% and possible workarounds

Lars commented my post suggesting me to put my proposal in a CIP so here I am.
Said that I have no experience on haskell programming language I was thinking to write down a proposal that focuses on updating those specifications that rule the protocol instead of suggesting source changes and I’m mainly referring to the Formal Cardano Ledger Spec. (SL-D5 v.0.2, 2019/10/08) document.
Do you think that this could be a valid approach or the CIP should analyze and propose those modifications to the code in order to achieve the expected result?
Thanks in advance to whom will give me any suggestion

1 Like

CIP’s aren’t necessarily code changes; in general they’re design documents, and can simply be process changes or specifications for off-blockchain activity. Here’s the doc that explains the major categories & other features of CIPs: cardano-foundation / CIPs / CIP1 /

When I submitted a CIP a few weeks ago I didn’t find much in practical instructions for submission, and had to imitate the process I saw was being followed by earlier CIP submitters. In short, you have to fork this repository…

… and create a new directory there, containing a Markdown format document of your CIP, in which the metadata Post-History: field can refer to this forum page and/or wherever you expect your proposal will be discussed. When you push those changes into your forked repository, it’ll create a pull request where the CIP maintainers & others will be able to comment on your proposal while it’s being reviewed for acceptance.


Ongoing discussion here: Double treasury taxation of 40% and possible workarounds

1 Like