# [TFIP-42] — Timelock Migration to Gnosis Safe Multi-Sig (Transition Period)
## **Abstract**
This is a defensive, temporary measure to secure protocol infrastructure during governance migration.
This proposal requests that the TrueFi DAO authorize the transfer of all administrative roles currently held by the DaoGovernor over the Timelock contract `0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07` to the existing New Treasury Gnosis Safe multi-signature wallet `0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b` on Ethereum Mainnet.
This transition is a **temporary security measure** designed to protect protocol-controlled vault factories and legacy smart contracts during the governance migration period. Specifically, this applies to the window in which:
* TRU tokens are locked in the Asset Portal, and
* The BRLA-based governance system on HyperEVM has not yet been deployed.
## **Background & Motivation**
### **Current Governance Architecture**
TrueFi’s on-chain governance currently operates via **Tally(DaoGovernor)**, where TRU token holders stake and vote on proposals. Successful proposals are executed through the **Timelock smart contract**, which acts as the administrator of several legacy components, including:
* Vault factories on Ethereum Mainnet
* Various legacy TrueFi smart contracts
* Other protocol-controlled addresses
**Timelock Address:**
`0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07`
### **The Governance Transition Problem**
TrueFi DAO is undergoing a strategic governance migration:
* TRU (Ethereum) → no longer the primary governance token
* BRLA (HyperEVM) → will become the new governance instrument
This creates a **temporary but critical security gap**:
1. TRU tokens are locked in the Asset Portal and cannot vote
2. BRLA governance is not yet live
3. Cross-chain governance (HyperEVM → Ethereum) is not deployed
During this period, the Timelock could be vulnerable to a **low-participation governance attack**.
### **The Risk**
If no action is taken:
* Governance attacks via Tally remain possible
* Vault factories and legacy contracts remain exposed
* Timelock delays limit the DAO’s ability to respond quickly
## **Proposal**
### **Primary Action — Transfer Tally's admin roles over Timelock contract to Gnosis Safe**
All administrative roles currently held by the Tally shall be transferred to:
**New Admin (Gnosis Safe):**
`0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b`
This Safe is already used as the New Treasury and operates as a **4-of-7 multi-signature wallet**.
### **Why a Gnosis Safe Multi-Sig**
* No single-party control
* Higher resistance to manipulation vs low-turnout votes
* Fully reversible once new governance is live
* Already known and trusted by the community
## **Gnosis Safe Details**
**Safe Address:** 0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b
**Network:** Ethereum Mainnet
**Threshold:** 4 of 7
**Type:** Gnosis Safe
### **Signers:**
AddressSigner0x5D545DE6e81da180dBbb57926a0e49be7c868Fb7 - Stefan Tanase
0x546AB7E55E9c9790679Bb2bE905300322A59Bb10 - 2nd CFO
0x97F8De405D7e70c0F66c2308d9882A9227097d6f - Sebastien Davies
0x25022f216b97641d396e6Efe68ba45F80AD7A56b - Ferengi
0xB2F3cE5e63b0c303C475667f8CB28a47b14b9d9b - Kelvin Sparks
0x2ac4a7daD1eE2eACfA3E90dd6C69466CC66Df7B2 - Goblin
0x57cD8ecAA060C857B23f9C68853f09dFfC3b7453 - Marcus Leanos
## **Action Items**
### **1.Transfer Admin Roles**
Grant all admin roles to Gnosis Safe
Action Type: grantRole 
To: Gnosis Safe (0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b)
Scope: Timelock contract (0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07)
**2.Revoke Tally Privileges**
After transfer, revoke all admin roles from the Tally to eliminate duplicate control
Action Type - revokeRole
To: DaoGovernor (0x585CcA060422ef1779Fb0Dd710A49e7C49A823C9)
Scope: Timelock Contract (0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07)
**3.Verification**
Core contributors will verify on-chain that:
1. Gnosis Safe holds all required admin roles
2. Timelock holds none
3. A confirmation report is posted to the forum
## **Duration & Reversal**
This is a **temporary arrangement**, remaining in effect until:
1. BRLA is live on HyperEVM
2. Cross-chain governance is deployed and audited
At that point, a new TFIP will transfer control back to DAO governance.
## **Risks & Mitigations**
Risk Mitigation: Signer collusion 4-of-7 threshold, distributed signers 
Key loss: Only 4 required
Governance delay: Public roadmap commitments
Scope creep: No new powers granted beyond Timelock
## **Governance Process**
### **Step 1 — Forum Discussion (72h)**
Community feedback and iteration
### **Step 2 — Tally Vote (Binding)**
On-chain execution of proposal
## **Conclusion**
TrueFi is at a critical point in its governance evolution.
The new BRLA structure introduces a temporary but meaningful security gap. This proposal provides a **practical, transparent, and reversible solution** by transferring control to a trusted multi-sig during this period.
This ensures:
* Protocol safety
* Operational continuity
* Minimal centralization
We encourage the community to support this proposal to enable a secure and orderly transition.
# [TFIP-41]: TrueFi Reconstitution and Transition to Brila
> TFIP-41 has been slightly updated relative to the forum and Snapshot versions
### **Summary**
TFIP-41 proposes the formal reconstitution of TrueFi into Brila, a streamlined and restructured organization designed for sustainable capital deployment across three operating pillars: NFT finance, real-world asset vaults, and treasury management solutions.
This proposal outlines the transfer of all activities, including management and governance mechanisms, from the TrueFi BVI corporate structure to the Brila corporate structure in Panama. It is intended to be the final TFIP under the TrueFi banner.
### **Context and Recap**
Over the past year, TrueFi has undergone a deliberate restructuring process. The organization has been streamlined, operational overhead has been reduced, the balance sheet has been strengthened, and governance inefficiencies have been addressed. Capital allocation has been reoriented toward productive, revenue-generating verticals.
Today, the project is anchored by three core pillars. The first is NFT finance through Cyan, which provides infrastructure enabling NFT-based financing and liquidity access. The second is real-world asset vaults, which facilitate institutional credit extension to vetted borrowers, with yield derived from interest income rather than token incentives. The third is treasury management solutions through Elara, a dollar-referenced treasury asset designed to preserve capital while generating controlled yield and serving as a base liquidity layer across the ecosystem.
These verticals represent the economic engine of the reconstituted project. The restructuring phase is complete. We’re into the execution phase now.
### **Why Reconstitution Is Necessary**
Despite meaningful operational progress, the legacy TrueFi structure imposes structural constraints. The historical token supply creates an overhang. Governance design reflects an earlier stage of the protocol’s life. Prior loan history and reputational complexity introduce friction. Over time, these factors limit flexibility and strategic optionality.
While significant effort has gone into repairing and stabilizing the protocol, sustainable forward growth requires a clean capital structure and a refreshed governance architecture. TFIP-41 formally separates the future operating platform from the historical constraints of the prior structure.
### **Proposal Overview**
Upon approval of this proposal, the existing TrueFi coporate structure entity will not be involved any more in the operatioanl and management activity of the Protocol. The governance forum will remain accessible for creditor-related matters, including ongoing discussions related to Archblock and similar legacy items.
Brila ecosystem will be fully operated and managed by a Panama corporate structure specially designed to oversee and manage the entire protocol (“the Brila Corproate Structure” or “BCS”). The Brilla Corporate Structure will issue the BRLA token and serve as the legal and operational steward of the ecosystem. BCS is able to govern capital allocation, treasury strategy, and execution across the three pillars, providing a clean and flexible operational base aligned with the project's long-term direction.
### **Token Economics: TRU and BRLA**
35% of the total BRLA supply will be allocated to attract TRU holders. The remaining 65% will be allocated toward ecosystem development, operational sustainability, balance sheet strength, and strategic growth initiatives.
A dedicated portal will be available **in the coming weeks**, where TRU holders may deposit their TRU **for a 30-DAY** window (from launch). Upon deposit, holders will be entitled to mint BRLA tokens. The conversion ratio between BRLA and TRU will be determined based on the total amount of TRU deposited into the portal relative to the fixed forty percent allocation reserved for TRU holders.
This structure ensures that the full allocation reserved for TRU holders is distributed transparently and proportionally based on participation. If more TRU holders will participate in supporting the BRLA new vision, the per-TRU BRLA allocation will adjust accordingly. If fewer TRU participants, the conversion ratio will reflect that lower participation. TRU not deposited during the allocated window will not be accepted at a later stage. Detailed technical specifications and timing will be provided prior to the launch of the dedicated portal.
### **Economic Model and Value Accrual**
Brila is structured around three operating pillars: NFT finance through Cyan, real-world asset lending through the legacy vault architecture, and treasury management solutions through Elara. Each of these verticals is designed to stand on its own economically. They are not dependent on token incentives to manufacture activity. They generate revenue through financing spreads, structured credit, and treasury yield strategies. Cyan and treasury management solutions in particular offer meaningful economic spread potential, while the lending vaults provide disciplined, interest-based yield derived from real borrowers.
The objective with BRLA is fundamentally different from earlier crypto token models. The project *will not* rely on emissions to incentivize activity or bootstrap artificial liquidity. There will be no programmatic inflation designed to stimulate short-term engagement at the expense of long-term dilution. Instead, the operating businesses are expected to generate revenue independently. Protocol revenues will accrue to the Foundation treasury and may be deployed by governance to support the long-term sustainability of the ecosystem, including grants, liquidity initiatives, partnerships, and other strategic treasury operations.
A key principle of the reconstitution is emission discipline. The historical TRU structure carried significant token overhang relative to the economic output of the protocol. BRLA is being introduced with the intention that token supply growth remains tightly controlled and aligned with the long-term sustainability of the ecosystem.
Any future emissions will be carefully evaluated by governance in the context of the protocol’s development and overall supply dynamics. Governance may from time to time determine adjustments to token supply or treasury operations intended to support the stability and resilience of the ecosystem, which could include discretionary market operations involving BRLA.
The objective is to ensure that protocol activity is supported by sustainable participation and real usage of the network rather than by token issuance designed to artificially stimulate short-term engagement.
BRLA is intended to function as a governance and coordination mechanism within the ecosystem and does not represent any ownership interest, claim on assets, or entitlement to revenues generated by the protocol or the Foundation.
This shift addresses one of the structural imbalances of the legacy system. TRU’s circulating supply expanded materially during periods when underlying protocol activity remained limited. The reconstitution aims to realign token supply dynamics with the sustainable development of the ecosystem.
BRLA is introduced with a focus on responsible supply management and long-term network coordination, avoiding structural overhang from historical emissions and reducing reliance on token issuance to stimulate participation.
### **Ecosystem and Launch Venue**
BRLA will launch on the HyperEVM and position its economic hub within the Hyperliquid ecosystem. While the project will remain cross-chain in product deployment, the primary token and liquidity center will sit on HyperEVM.
This represents a deliberate strategic shift. Centralized exchange listings are operationally costly, structurally restrictive, and often misaligned with smaller, capital-disciplined projects. The legacy TRU footprint on centralized exchanges served a purpose in an earlier phase of the market. For Brila, competing on product quality and economic fundamentals is more important than maintaining expensive exchange relationships.
The Hyperliquid ecosystem offers a more aligned environment: on-chain liquidity, transparent market structure, and lower structural overhead. By anchoring BRLA within HyperEVM, the project aligns itself with an ecosystem that reflects the current direction of market infrastructure while preserving the flexibility to operate across chains.
### **Governance**
Upon completion of the transition period, TRU governance will formally sunset. A new governance framework under BRLA will be introduced by the Panama-based entity. The new governance architecture will be designed to enable clearer capital allocation authority, operational agility, reduced structural deadlock, and stronger long-term economic alignment.
A separate governance framework document will be introduced to detail the mechanics of BRLA governance.
### **Treatment of Legacy Matters**
The reconstitution does not extinguish or ignore legacy matters. However, the loans and defaults being administered by Archblock are not the responsibility of TrueFi (nor have they been since the DAO was first formed). The existing forum will remain accessible for creditor communications. Archblock and related recovery processes will continue independently. Historical obligations are not erased by this proposal.
The objective is to separate forward-facing operations from structural complexity and historical governance while maintaining transparency and continuity where required.
### **Rationale**
TFIP-41 resets the capital structure, removes historical token overhang, eliminates governance inefficiencies, strengthens balance sheet flexibility, and aligns token supply with productive, revenue-generating verticals. The reconstitution enables the project to operate as an economically sustainable platform rather than as a legacy governance shell constrained by its past structure.
### **Implementation Timeline**
Following publication, the proposal will proceed through the standard governance voting process. Upon approval, actual governance procedure will be disconnected and transferred to the Brila Corporate Structure. The dedicated portal will then open for a defined window, after which BRLA issuance will be finalized and TRU will sunset. Specific dates will be published prior to execution.
### **Closing Statement**
TrueFi has spent the past year cleaning up its structure, strengthening its balance sheet, and building revenue-generating verticals designed for durability. TFIP-41 formalizes the transition from restructuring to execution.
This is not an abandonment of TrueFi’s history. It is a structured evolution beyond its constraints. The next chapter begins under Brila.
### Next Steps
Tally vote: The proposal will be posted on Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-40.1] Timelock TRU allocation for rebranding and treasury recapitalization
After posting **TFIP-40**, we identified a technical issue with the **execution parameters of the Tally proposal**.
Specifically, the proposal did not leave enough tokens in the source wallet to cover the **Tally execution fees** required for the transaction. Because of this, the transaction fails in simulation and would fail during on-chain execution as well.
To resolve this, we are reposting the **same proposal under TFIP-40.1**, with slightly adjusted parameters so that enough tokens remain available to cover the execution fees.
The **substance of the proposal remains unchanged**.
Background
----------
Following the approval and execution of **TFIP-34 – Foundation Update: Wallet Recovery and Treasury Consolidation**, the Foundation consolidated DAO-controlled assets under a unified operational structure.
Separately, under **TFIP-37 – Authorization of TrueFi Rebrand and Treasury Recapitalization**, the DAO approved the strategic direction for TrueFi’s rebranding and broader treasury recapitalization initiative.
TFIP-40 was introduced as an extension to authorize the allocation of assets held in a “timelock/public treasury” address to support execution of TFIP-37.
***
## Correction Notice (Form, not Substance)
During the preparation of the on-chain **Tally** execution, we identified a **parameter error** in TFIP-40:
* TFIP-40 referenced the **Timelock smart contract** address: `0x5Fe2F5F2Cc97887746C5cB44386A94061F35DcC4`
* However, the intended target for this action is the **Public Treasury Timelock wallet**: `0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07`
Because these are **different addresses**, the asset inventory is also different. This update is therefore a **correction of form (address + assets)**, not of purpose: the DAO intent remains to allocate relevant public-treasury assets to support the execution of TFIP-37.
***
## Updated Assets (Public Treasury Timelock)
The balances held at `0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07` intended to be allocated under this revised proposal are:
* **6,151.0529 USDC**
* **435,344.2321 TRU**
***
## Proposal
This proposal seeks DAO authorization to:
1. Recognize `0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07` as the **correct Public Treasury Timelock address** referenced in the proposal.
2. Allocate the assets held in this wallet (**6,151.0529 USDC and 435,344.2321 TRU**) to support the execution of **TrueFi Rebranding and Treasury Recapitalization**, as outlined in **TFIP-37**.
3. Transfer these assets to the Foundation-managed operational multisignature wallet: **New Treasury -** `0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b`
4. Ensure the assets remain **fully visible and traceable on-chain**, consistent with the treasury consolidation principles established under **TFIP-34**.
***
## Rationale
This action aligns directly with the DAO-approved strategic direction under **TFIP-37** and enables execution using **existing DAO-owned resources**, without requiring new minting, inflationary actions, or premature external fundraising.
***
## Additional Context
The Foundation continues to work through legacy infrastructure and historical treasury arrangements. As part of that work, we will occasionally encounter discrepancies between historical labeling/assumptions and the on-chain reality. In this case, the goal remains unchanged, but the exact address and asset inventory required correction prior to any binding on-chain execution.
***
## Next Governance Steps
As this proposal does not fall under simplified governance exemptions, it must follow the full governance process:
**Tally Vote:** If Snapshot passes (or the amendment period concludes), the proposal proceeds to Tally for a binding on-chain vote.
# [TFIP-40] Timelock TRU allocation for rebranding and treasury recapitalization
## Background
Following the approval and execution of **TFIP-34 – Foundation Update: Wallet Recovery and Treasury Consolidation**, the Foundation consolidated DAO-controlled assets under a unified operational structure.
Separately, under **TFIP-37 – Authorization of TrueFi Rebrand and Treasury Recapitalization**, the DAO approved the strategic direction for TrueFi’s rebranding and broader treasury recapitalization initiative.
TFIP-40 was introduced as an extension to authorize the allocation of assets held in a “timelock/public treasury” address to support execution of TFIP-37.
***
## Correction Notice (Form, not Substance)
During the preparation of the on-chain **Tally** execution, we identified a **parameter error** in TFIP-40:
* TFIP-40 referenced the **Timelock smart contract** address:
`0x5Fe2F5F2Cc97887746C5cB44386A94061F35DcC4`
* However, the intended target for this action is the **Public Treasury Timelock wallet**:
`0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07`
Because these are **different addresses**, the asset inventory is also different. This update is therefore a **correction of form (address + assets)**, not of purpose: the DAO intent remains to allocate relevant public-treasury assets to support the execution of TFIP-37.
***
## Updated Assets (Public Treasury Timelock)
The balances held at `0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07` intended to be allocated under this revised proposal are:
* **6,151.0529 USDC**
* **435,344.2321 TRU**
***
## Proposal
This proposal seeks DAO authorization to:
1. Recognize `0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07` as the **correct Public Treasury Timelock address** referenced in the proposal.
2. Allocate the assets held in this wallet (**6,151.0529 USDC and 435,344.2321 TRU**) to support the execution of **TrueFi Rebranding and Treasury Recapitalization**, as outlined in **TFIP-37**.
3. Transfer these assets to the Foundation-managed operational multisignature wallet: **New Treasury -** `0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b`
4. Ensure the assets remain **fully visible and traceable on-chain**, consistent with the treasury consolidation principles established under **TFIP-34**.
***
## Rationale
This action aligns directly with the DAO-approved strategic direction under **TFIP-37** and enables execution using **existing DAO-owned resources**, without requiring new minting, inflationary actions, or premature external fundraising.
***
## Additional Context
The Foundation continues to work through legacy infrastructure and historical treasury arrangements. As part of that work, we will occasionally encounter discrepancies between historical labeling/assumptions and the on-chain reality. In this case, the goal remains unchanged, but the exact address and asset inventory required correction prior to any binding on-chain execution.
***
## Next Governance Steps
As this proposal does not fall under simplified governance exemptions, it must follow the full governance process:
**Tally Vote:**
If Snapshot passes (or the amendment period concludes), the proposal proceeds to Tally for a binding on-chain vote.
# [TFIP-39]: Legacy Blockwater BUSD preservation and conversion proposal
## Summary (TL;DR)
This proposal seeks approval to preserve lender recovery value by authorizing the conversion of **645,405.81 BUSD** currently held in the **Blockwater Loan smart contract** into USDC or USDT, in light of the announced deprecation of BUSD.
The conversion is expected to incur an approximate **1% execution cost**, resulting in an estimated **638,951.76 USDC/USDT**, and is intended solely to\*\* mitigate the risk of BUSD becoming illiquid or valueless over time\*\*.
## Background
Following the historical default of Blockwater in the legacy tfBUSD pool, a partial repayment equivalent to approximately 19% of outstanding principal was repaid and remains held today in the[ Blockwater Loan smart contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0x4a66a867f52df4ed1d8580a1c383b2dd036a3c47), denominated in BUSD.
These assets represent one of the remaining recovery paths available to lenders affected by the Blockwater default. They are not held in SAFU and are not part of the active DAO treasury, but they remain economically relevant to the resolution of legacy defaults.
## BUSD Deprecation Risk
Paxos, the issuer of BUSD, has [publicly announced](https://www.paxos.com/newsroom/paxos-will-halt-minting-new-busd-tokens) the halt of minting new BUSD tokens and the progressive wind-down of the asset. While BUSD remains usable today, it is broadly understood that:
* BUSD liquidity is expected to decline over time;
* long-term usability and market support are uncertain;
* the probability of BUSD becoming illiquid or effectively valueless increases if no action is taken.
In this context, continuing to hold recovery assets denominated in BUSD exposes lenders to asymmetric downside risk with no compensating upside.
## Problem Statement
Absent action by governance:
* lenders risk recovering 645,405.81 BUSD that may eventually have negligible or zero value;
* the DAO would knowingly allow a recoverable legacy asset to deteriorate;
* the opportunity to preserve meaningful recovery value may be lost permanently.
This proposal does not attempt to modify historical defaults, restructure liabilities, or accelerate distributions. Its sole purpose is asset preservation.
## Proposed Action
The DAO is asked to approve the following high-level mandate:
* Authorize the conversion of 645,405.81 BUSD currently held in the Blockwater Loan smart contract into USDC or USDT.
* Accept an estimated ~1% execution cost, resulting in approximately 638,951.76 USDC/USDT.
* Ensure that the converted stablecoins remain designated for Blockwater-related lender recoveries.
## **Implementation Steps**
### **Step 1 – SAFU Redemption**
As a first step, the DAO will execute a **redeem operation on the SAFU smart contract**, which will result in the following:
* **Transfer of BUSD** from the Blockwater Loan smart contract into the SAFU smart contract.
* **Burning of the corresponding LOAN tokens** held by SAFU.
While the DAO’s initial preference was to preserve LOAN tokens, this outcome is **technically unavoidable** given the design of the legacy contracts. The resulting on-chain transaction will serve as an explicit and verifiable record that the LOAN tokens were burned **solely in furtherance of the objectives of TFIP-39**, namely asset preservation for lenders.
### **Step 2 – SAFU Rescue to Treasury**
Following the **SAFU smart contract upgrade approved under TFIP-38**, the DAO will invoke the newly introduced `rescue` function to:
* transfer the recovered **BUSD from the SAFU smart contract** to the **TrueFi Foundation New Treasury** address.
**Disclaimer:**
At the time of publishing this proposal, **TFIP-38 has not yet been voted on or executed**. As a result, the `rescue` function may not be available during Tally simulation, and simulation errors may occur.
Execution of TFIP-39 is therefore **explicitly conditional** on:
* TFIP-38 passing governance vote; and
* TFIP-38 being successfully executed on-chain.
If TFIP-38 is not approved and executed, the transactions described in this proposal **will not be executed** and would otherwise revert.
### **Step 3 – BUSD Conversion**
Once the BUSD is held in the **TrueFi Foundation New Treasury**, the DAO will proceed with:
* the conversion of **645,405.81 BUSD** into **USDC or USDT**;
* accepting an estimated execution cost of approximately **1%**;
* ensuring that the resulting **USDC/USDT is not used for any other purpose**, and remains designated exclusively for Blockwater-related lender recoveries.
### **Execution Authority**
All on-chain actions described above will be executed through the DAO’s standard governance execution mechanisms, including **Timelock execution via Tally**, in accordance with established governance procedures.
## Governance Intent
The intent of this proposal is to obtain community approval for the objective and outcome, namely:
* extracting the BUSD recovery assets from the Blockwater Loan smart contract;
* converting them into USDC or USDT to preserve value;
* preserving all existing LOAN and DEF token balances, without triggering burns or lifecycle finalization mechanics.
## Conclusion
TFIP-39 is a narrowly scoped, risk-mitigating proposal intended to prevent the avoidable impairment of lender recovery assets. By authorizing the conversion of BUSD into a more durable stablecoin, the DAO acts prudently in the face of known asset deprecation risk while preserving full flexibility for future legacy resolutions.
## Next Governance Steps
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
1. Tally Vote: Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-38.3]: Legacy SAFU governance unlock and treasury reallocation Passed
## Summary (TL;DR)
This proposal addresses a governance and contract-level limitation affecting the legacy SAFU smart contract, which currently holds a significant amount of slashed TRU tokens originating from historical defaults in the tfBUSD TrueFi DAO pool.
TFIP-38 proposes a narrowly scoped, technical action to:
Upgrade the SAFU smart contract to include a rescueToken function controlled by the protocol Timelock; and
Transfer the TRU tokens currently held by SAFU to the TrueFi Foundation Treasury via the Timelock.
This proposal does not seek to resolve or finalize the handling of legacy defaulted loans, recovered assets, or outstanding on-chain artifacts. Those topics are documented for transparency and will be addressed through future governance discussions.
## Background: Legacy SAFU and tfBUSD Defaults
In 2022, two borrowers in the tfBUSD TrueFi DAO pool — Blockwater Technologies and New World Holdings / Invictus Capital — defaulted on their loans.
Following these defaults:
The SAFU mechanism was triggered correctly on-chain.
TRU tokens were slashed from stakers and transferred to the SAFU contract.
Defaulted LOAN tokens and Deficiency Claim (DEF) tokens were minted according to the protocol design.
The tfBUSD pool was later closed and is no longer active.
At the same time, Archblock assumed the role of Special Servicing Agent (SSA) and has since coordinated recovery efforts through a combination of legal action and negotiated settlements, both on-chain and off-chain.
As a result, the protocol today reflects a mismatch between historical economic handling and current on-chain state, particularly with respect to assets held in the SAFU contract.
## Role of Archblock as Special Servicing Agent
Following these defaults, Archblock assumed responsibility as Special Servicing Agent (SSA) for the tfBUSD pool, acting on behalf of lenders to recover value through off-chain means.
This role and mandate were communicated transparently to the community.
**Official tfBUSD Default Update**
Archblock publicly confirmed:
Both Blockwater and Invictus had defaulted
Archblock was leading recovery efforts via legal and negotiated channels
Recoveries would be pursued and distributed for the benefit of tfBUSD lenders
**Forum reference:**
[https://forum.truefi.io/t/archblock-special-servicing-update/1481](https://forum.truefi.io/t/archblock-special-servicing-update/1481) [https://forum.truefi.io/t/proposal-for-ssa-advisory-and-legal-services-invoicing/1488](https://forum.truefi.io/t/proposal-for-ssa-advisory-and-legal-services-invoicing/1488)
Archblock has since:
Initiated bankruptcy and criminal proceedings (Blockwater)
Coordinated liquidation processes (Invictus)
Tried to recover and distribut funds on-chain but outside SAFU default handling
Continued to communicate progress to the community
Critically, no SAFU funds were used on-chain to make the pool whole, and no on-chain buyback or burn of DEF tokens was executed.
## Recovered BUSD in the Blockwater Loan Contract
After the Blockwater loan defaulted, a portion of the borrowed assets was repaid directly into the Blockwater loan smart contract prior to the completion of the SAFU handling process.
As of today, approximately 645,000 BUSD remains held within the Blockwater loan contract:
[https://etherscan.io/address/0x4a66a867f52df4ed1d8580a1c383b2dd036a3c47](https://etherscan.io/address/0x4a66a867f52df4ed1d8580a1c383b2dd036a3c47)
These funds represent on-chain repayments associated with a legacy defaulted loan. Due to the historical handling of recoveries both on-chain and off-chain, and the subsequent closure of the tfBUSD pool, these funds were never reconciled through the standard SAFU default-resolution flow.
TFIP-38 does not propose the immediate distribution, utilization, or reallocation of these BUSD funds.
## Current State
As of today:
The tfBUSD pool is inactive and cannot be used for further lender repayments.
SAFU holds approximately 45.28 million TRU tokens that were slashed during the legacy defaults.
SAFU also holds or is associated with other legacy on-chain artifacts (LOAN tokens, DEF tokens, and recovered assets), which are not addressed by this proposal.
The SAFU contract does not currently include a generic mechanism for governance-controlled token recovery.
This lack of flexibility prevents the DAO from exercising clear governance control over assets held within SAFU.
## Purpose of This Proposal
The purpose of TFIP-38 is not to resolve legacy defaults or distribute recovered funds.
Instead, its sole objective is to:
restore governance control over assets held by SAFU, starting with TRU tokens; and
enable future, deliberate, and community-driven decisions regarding the remaining legacy artifacts.
This is achieved by introducing a standard rescueToken function under Timelock control.
## Why a Limited-Scope Proposal
Legacy default handling involves:
partially repaid loans,
off-chain recoveries,
inactive pools, and
unresolved on-chain artifacts.
Resolving these elements requires careful analysis, coordination, and community input. Attempting to bundle such decisions into a single proposal would introduce unnecessary complexity and risk.
TFIP-38 therefore deliberately limits its scope to enabling governance flexibility, without prejudging future outcomes.
## Proposal
TFIP-38 proposes the following actions:
**1. Upgrade the SAFU Smart Contract**
The SAFU smart contract will be upgraded to include a rescueToken function, callable exclusively by the protocol Timelock.
This function enables governance-controlled recovery of ERC-20 tokens held by the SAFU contract.
**2. Transfer TRU Tokens from SAFU to the TrueFi Foundation Treasury**
Following the upgrade, all TRU tokens currently held by SAFU — approximately 45,284,523 TRU — will be transferred to the TrueFi Foundation Treasury via the Timelock and used as treasury reserve fund for the Rebrand.
These tokens will thereafter be managed under standard DAO governance processes.
## Explicit Non-Goals of This Proposal
TFIP-38 does not:
burn DEF tokens;
burn LOAN tokens;
distribute or reallocate recovered BUSD;
resolve legacy lender claims; or
determine the final treatment of recovered assets.
All such topics will be addressed in future governance proposals following additional analysis and community discussion.
**Impact**
Restores governance control over slashed TRU tokens.
Removes a critical operational limitation from the SAFU contract.
Improves transparency and auditability.
Establishes a clean foundation for future, well-scoped proposals addressing legacy defaults.
## Conclusion
TFIP-38 is a narrowly scoped governance-enablement proposal.
It does not rewrite history, alter lender outcomes, or resolve legacy defaults. Instead, it unlocks the DAO’s ability to responsibly manage assets held within SAFU and prepares the protocol for future decisions regarding legacy default handling.
## Next Governance Steps
As this proposal does not fall under simplified governance exemptions, it must follow the full governance process:
Tally Vote: If Snapshot passes (or the amendment period concludes), the proposal proceeds to Tally for a binding on-chain vote.
# [TFIP-37.3]: Authorization of TrueFi Rebrand and Treasury Recapitalization rep
Due to the holiday period, community participation in this proposal was limited.
Accordingly, we have decided to resubmit TFIP-37.3 under the same terms as the original proposal.
# Summary
This proposal requests community approval to rebrand the TrueFi project and to mint the remaining TRU token supply to fund this transition and future growth.
Over the past year, the Board and Foundation have worked to clean up legacy issues, stabilize operations, and build new products. However, the TrueFi brand continues to carry reputational baggage from earlier eras that no longer reflect the team, the technology, or the direction of the project.
A rebrand allows the protocol to retain its technology (including Cyan, the TrueFi vault architecture, and the stablecoin/CDP system) while cleanly separating from the legacy identity that has become a significant headwind to growth and business development.
# Background
TrueFi has gone through substantial internal transformation in the last 12 months. The current contributors have:
Streamlined governance and operations Consolidated technical assets Integrated Cyan Developed a stablecoin and CDP architecture Improved financial discipline Invested in modernizing the infrastructure
These improvements position the project for renewed growth. However, despite this progress, the brand itself remains one of the largest obstacles.
# The Problem: The TrueFi Brand No Longer Represents the Project
The reputation TrueFi accumulated from 2020–2023 (governance disputes, misaligned incentives, unresolved forum discussions, contributor turnover, and loan disputes from teams long gone) continues to resurface despite the current team’s clean track record.
This manifests in several ways: BD conversations that begin with legacy concerns unrelated to today’s contributors Questions on socials about events that occurred years ago under prior teams Negative associations that overshadow new products and integrations Confusion about which groups or technologies are still part of the project Community members repeatedly asking why the protocol has not rebranded The brand has become a structural drag on credibility, growth, hiring, partnerships, and even basic communications.
The technology is strong. The team is aligned. The opportunity is real. **The brand is a bottleneck.** A clean slate solves this.
# Rationale for Rebranding
**The Community Has Actively Requested a Rebrand**
Multiple members of the Telegram community have raised the idea of rebranding, recognizing that the legacy issues are not going away and continue to distract from the work actually being built today. This proposal formalizes that discussion and acknowledges the community’s input.
**The Brand Carries Reputational Baggage That No Longer Reflects Reality**
Despite the current team’s work to fix the past, nearly all external conversations still surface history that:
The current contributors did not create The current Board has already resolved or addressed The technology stack no longer reflects
This creates unnecessary friction for BD, partnerships, liquidity collaborators, and ecosystem conversations.
A Unified Brand Enables the Project to Present Its Technology as a Cohesive System We now operate: Cyan (NFT-backed lending) TrueFi vault infrastructure A stablecoin and CDP system Off-chain borrower evaluation and credit primitives
These should sit under one coherent brand, not fragmented legacy naming.
**The Rebrand Allows Us to Move Forward Without Dragging the Past Along**
The rebrand is not about erasing history (the TrueFi forum will remain, but separately for legacy discussions) but about building a project that can grow without constantly answering for events unrelated to the present.
This creates: A clear identity A cleaner narrative A more credible BD posture A healthier environment for tokenholders A fresh foundation for everything we build next
# The Rebrand Requires Resources: Treasury Recapitalization
Executing a proper rebrand and transition (including audits, documentation, business development, integrations, design work, communications, and ongoing operational continuity) requires adequate funding. Minting the remaining TRU supply does not change the maximum token supply, was always contemplated in the original token design, and provides the balance-sheet capital necessary to execute this transition responsibly. This recapitalization ensures that the project can move forward without compromise and with the resources needed to complete the rebrand effectively..
# Scope of This Proposal
**1. Approve a Full Rebrand of the Protocol** This includes: Developing a new project name and identity Updating documentation, branding, and public interfaces Migrating active governance, engineering, and communications to the new brand Retaining the TrueFi forum for historical and claims-related matters
**2. Mint the Remaining TRU Supply Into the Treasury** Funds will support: Rebrand execution Operational continuity BD and liquidity partner engagement Engineering, audits, and integrations Communications and documentation updates Additional liquidity for Cyan, lending vaults, stablecoin, and CDP infrastructure
**3. Establish the Operational Framework for the Brand Transition** The transition will include coordinating contributors around a unified rebrand plan, updating all public documentation and technical materials to reflect the new identity, preparing communication packages for partners and ecosystem participants, and ensuring that Cyan, the vault architecture, and the stablecoin/CDP systems are properly represented under the new brand.
This framework also includes planning the sequence of interface updates, consolidating governance and communication channels, and managing the rollout of the new brand across all user- and developer-facing surfaces. This proposal focuses exclusively on the brand transition and does not authorize any token migration or reconstitution, which would require separate governance action if pursued.
**4. Resume and Complete Critical Technical Workstreams** As part of the brand transition and in preparation for renewed growth, several technical initiatives that were previously paused due to funding and prioritization constraints will be resumed and completed.
This includes restarting the external audit process for Elara V1, which had been paused during earlier stages of the project. Completing this audit is a prerequisite for deploying Elara as a production-grade system and for engaging with partners that require formally reviewed smart contract infrastructure. In parallel, the CDP architecture will undergo its own independent audit to ensure the security, correctness, and robustness of the system before broader usage.
In addition, work on KYC and AML integrations (which had also been paused) will be resumed. These integrations are necessary to support compliant counterparties, enable broader participation in the protocol’s products, and ensure the infrastructure can support institutional and regulated use cases as adoption increases.
Finally, additional capital will be allocated to support early-stage liquidity requirements across the protocol’s products. This includes ensuring sufficient liquidity is available to support initial usage, testing, and partner onboarding, without relying on ad hoc or reactive measures.
Together, these workstreams ensure that the protocol’s technical foundations, compliance capabilities, and liquidity posture are aligned with the expectations of a modern, growth-oriented on-chain financial platform.
**Implementation Timeline (3–5 Weeks)**
**Week 0–1:** Mint remaining TRU into the treasury Begin final brand development, naming, and design Prepare updated documentation and transition plan
**Week 2–3:** Announce new brand identity Begin migration of public-facing interfaces, documentation, and communication channels
**Week 3–5:** Complete migration to new brand Provide transparency report on treasury usage and remaining runway Publish updated BD, partner, and technical documentation under new brand
# Next Governance Steps
As this proposal does not fall under simplified governance exemptions, it must follow the full governance process:
The proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote minting and sending TRUat the execution of the proposal to TrueFi Foundation New Treasury wallet.
# Conclusion
TFIP-37 initiates a straightforward but essential step: separating the future of the protocol from the legacy of the TrueFi brand.
This allows the community to focus on what has actually been built (modern credit primitives, NFT-backed lending, stablecoin/CDP infrastructure, and a unified technology stack) rather than continuously answering for a past that no longer reflects the team, the products, or the direction of the project.
The combination of a clean brand and a properly funded treasury gives the protocol the best possible foundation for growth.
# [TFIP-36.2]: Proposal to Update Signer on TrueFi Multisig Wallets Reposted
Due to the holiday period, community participation in this proposal was limited.
Accordingly, we have decided to resubmit TFIP-36.2 under the same terms as the original proposal.
# Summary
This proposal seeks to update one of the signers on three TrueFi multisig wallets:
* Foundation Payroll multisig - 0xC2636A948a730D4578E07c36aFc6f8A8Fef59Df1
* Plume multisig - 0xCd130E5833a7A30BcADBDB57DFc7aC88d2F8b572
* New Treasury multisig - 0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b for operational continuity and to reflect the current availability of participants. Specifically, we propose replacing the current signer Vivek at address 0x622a48841fC326C4C60d3008bACc1a13011Af624 with Goblin at a new address 0x2ac4a7daD1eE2eACfA3E90dd6C69466CC66Df7B2.
# Motivation
TrueFi DAO relies on a multisig for executing DAO-approved transactions and maintaining control over treasury assets. To ensure the multisig continues to function securely and efficiently, it’s important to keep signer addresses up to date. This change ensures that all participants remain active and reachable at their signing address.
# Specification
Replace the existing signer on the TrueFi DAO Treasury Gnosis Safe, TrueFi Foundation Payroll Gnosis Safe, and TrueFi DAO Plume Gnosis Safe:
Remove: Vivek – 0x622a48841fC326C4C60d3008bACc1a13011Af624, 0xA8a9c3CB60dc5EE59464883Af56Ae8511B13C9F6
Add: Goblin – 0x2ac4a7daD1eE2eACfA3E90dd6C69466CC66Df7B2
There will be no change to the total number of signers or the signing threshold.
# Next Steps
1. Tally vote: The proposal will be posted on Tally for the final vote.
2. To memorialize the proposal on Tally, 1 TRU will be transferred from Timelock contract to the TrueFi Foundation New Treasury.
3. The replacement will be handled on the SAFE level.
# TFIP-37.2: Authorization of TrueFi Rebrand and Treasury Recapitalization rep
Due to the holiday period, community participation in this proposal was limited.
Accordingly, we have decided to resubmit TFIP-37.2 under the same terms as the original proposal.
# Summary
This proposal requests community approval to rebrand the TrueFi project and to mint the remaining TRU token supply to fund this transition and future growth.
Over the past year, the Board and Foundation have worked to clean up legacy issues, stabilize operations, and build new products. However, the TrueFi brand continues to carry reputational baggage from earlier eras that no longer reflect the team, the technology, or the direction of the project.
A rebrand allows the protocol to retain its technology (including Cyan, the TrueFi vault architecture, and the stablecoin/CDP system) while cleanly separating from the legacy identity that has become a significant headwind to growth and business development.
# Background
TrueFi has gone through substantial internal transformation in the last 12 months. The current contributors have:
Streamlined governance and operations Consolidated technical assets Integrated Cyan Developed a stablecoin and CDP architecture Improved financial discipline Invested in modernizing the infrastructure
These improvements position the project for renewed growth. However, despite this progress, the brand itself remains one of the largest obstacles.
# The Problem: The TrueFi Brand No Longer Represents the Project
The reputation TrueFi accumulated from 2020–2023 (governance disputes, misaligned incentives, unresolved forum discussions, contributor turnover, and loan disputes from teams long gone) continues to resurface despite the current team’s clean track record.
This manifests in several ways: BD conversations that begin with legacy concerns unrelated to today’s contributors Questions on socials about events that occurred years ago under prior teams Negative associations that overshadow new products and integrations Confusion about which groups or technologies are still part of the project Community members repeatedly asking why the protocol has not rebranded The brand has become a structural drag on credibility, growth, hiring, partnerships, and even basic communications.
The technology is strong. The team is aligned. The opportunity is real. **The brand is a bottleneck.** A clean slate solves this.
# Rationale for Rebranding
**The Community Has Actively Requested a Rebrand**
Multiple members of the Telegram community have raised the idea of rebranding, recognizing that the legacy issues are not going away and continue to distract from the work actually being built today. This proposal formalizes that discussion and acknowledges the community’s input.
**The Brand Carries Reputational Baggage That No Longer Reflects Reality**
Despite the current team’s work to fix the past, nearly all external conversations still surface history that:
The current contributors did not create The current Board has already resolved or addressed The technology stack no longer reflects
This creates unnecessary friction for BD, partnerships, liquidity collaborators, and ecosystem conversations.
A Unified Brand Enables the Project to Present Its Technology as a Cohesive System We now operate: Cyan (NFT-backed lending) TrueFi vault infrastructure A stablecoin and CDP system Off-chain borrower evaluation and credit primitives
These should sit under one coherent brand, not fragmented legacy naming.
**The Rebrand Allows Us to Move Forward Without Dragging the Past Along**
The rebrand is not about erasing history (the TrueFi forum will remain, but separately for legacy discussions) but about building a project that can grow without constantly answering for events unrelated to the present.
This creates: A clear identity A cleaner narrative A more credible BD posture A healthier environment for tokenholders A fresh foundation for everything we build next
# The Rebrand Requires Resources: Treasury Recapitalization
Executing a proper rebrand and transition (including audits, documentation, business development, integrations, design work, communications, and ongoing operational continuity) requires adequate funding. Minting the remaining TRU supply does not change the maximum token supply, was always contemplated in the original token design, and provides the balance-sheet capital necessary to execute this transition responsibly. This recapitalization ensures that the project can move forward without compromise and with the resources needed to complete the rebrand effectively..
# Scope of This Proposal
**1. Approve a Full Rebrand of the Protocol** This includes: Developing a new project name and identity Updating documentation, branding, and public interfaces Migrating active governance, engineering, and communications to the new brand Retaining the TrueFi forum for historical and claims-related matters
**2. Mint the Remaining TRU Supply Into the Treasury** Funds will support: Rebrand execution Operational continuity BD and liquidity partner engagement Engineering, audits, and integrations Communications and documentation updates Additional liquidity for Cyan, lending vaults, stablecoin, and CDP infrastructure
**3. Establish the Operational Framework for the Brand Transition** The transition will include coordinating contributors around a unified rebrand plan, updating all public documentation and technical materials to reflect the new identity, preparing communication packages for partners and ecosystem participants, and ensuring that Cyan, the vault architecture, and the stablecoin/CDP systems are properly represented under the new brand.
This framework also includes planning the sequence of interface updates, consolidating governance and communication channels, and managing the rollout of the new brand across all user- and developer-facing surfaces. This proposal focuses exclusively on the brand transition and does not authorize any token migration or reconstitution, which would require separate governance action if pursued.
**4. Resume and Complete Critical Technical Workstreams** As part of the brand transition and in preparation for renewed growth, several technical initiatives that were previously paused due to funding and prioritization constraints will be resumed and completed.
This includes restarting the external audit process for Elara V1, which had been paused during earlier stages of the project. Completing this audit is a prerequisite for deploying Elara as a production-grade system and for engaging with partners that require formally reviewed smart contract infrastructure. In parallel, the CDP architecture will undergo its own independent audit to ensure the security, correctness, and robustness of the system before broader usage.
In addition, work on KYC and AML integrations (which had also been paused) will be resumed. These integrations are necessary to support compliant counterparties, enable broader participation in the protocol’s products, and ensure the infrastructure can support institutional and regulated use cases as adoption increases.
Finally, additional capital will be allocated to support early-stage liquidity requirements across the protocol’s products. This includes ensuring sufficient liquidity is available to support initial usage, testing, and partner onboarding, without relying on ad hoc or reactive measures.
Together, these workstreams ensure that the protocol’s technical foundations, compliance capabilities, and liquidity posture are aligned with the expectations of a modern, growth-oriented on-chain financial platform.
**Implementation Timeline (3–5 Weeks)**
**Week 0–1:** Mint remaining TRU into the treasury Begin final brand development, naming, and design Prepare updated documentation and transition plan
**Week 2–3:** Announce new brand identity Begin migration of public-facing interfaces, documentation, and communication channels
**Week 3–5:** Complete migration to new brand Provide transparency report on treasury usage and remaining runway Publish updated BD, partner, and technical documentation under new brand
# Next Governance Steps
As this proposal does not fall under simplified governance exemptions, it must follow the full governance process:
The proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote minting and sending TRUat the execution of the proposal to TrueFi Foundation New Treasury wallet.
# Conclusion
TFIP-37 initiates a straightforward but essential step: separating the future of the protocol from the legacy of the TrueFi brand.
This allows the community to focus on what has actually been built (modern credit primitives, NFT-backed lending, stablecoin/CDP infrastructure, and a unified technology stack) rather than continuously answering for a past that no longer reflects the team, the products, or the direction of the project.
The combination of a clean brand and a properly funded treasury gives the protocol the best possible foundation for growth.
# TFIP-36.1: Proposal to Update Signer on TrueFi Multisig Wallets Reposted
Due to the holiday period, community participation in this proposal was limited.
Accordingly, we have decided to resubmit TFIP-36.1 under the same terms as the original proposal.
# Summary
This proposal seeks to update one of the signers on three TrueFi multisig wallets:
* Foundation Payroll multisig - 0xC2636A948a730D4578E07c36aFc6f8A8Fef59Df1
* Plume multisig - 0xCd130E5833a7A30BcADBDB57DFc7aC88d2F8b572
* New Treasury multisig - 0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b for operational continuity and to reflect the current availability of participants. Specifically, we propose replacing the current signer Vivek at address 0x622a48841fC326C4C60d3008bACc1a13011Af624 with Goblin at a new address 0x2ac4a7daD1eE2eACfA3E90dd6C69466CC66Df7B2.
# Motivation
TrueFi DAO relies on a multisig for executing DAO-approved transactions and maintaining control over treasury assets. To ensure the multisig continues to function securely and efficiently, it’s important to keep signer addresses up to date. This change ensures that all participants remain active and reachable at their signing address.
# Specification
Replace the existing signer on the TrueFi DAO Treasury Gnosis Safe, TrueFi Foundation Payroll Gnosis Safe, and TrueFi DAO Plume Gnosis Safe:
Remove: Vivek – 0x622a48841fC326C4C60d3008bACc1a13011Af624, 0xA8a9c3CB60dc5EE59464883Af56Ae8511B13C9F6
Add: Goblin – 0x2ac4a7daD1eE2eACfA3E90dd6C69466CC66Df7B2
There will be no change to the total number of signers or the signing threshold.
# Next Steps
1. Tally vote: The proposal will be posted on Tally for the final vote.
2. To memorialize the proposal on Tally, 1 TRU will be transferred from Timelock contract to the TrueFi Foundation New Treasury.
3. The replacement will be handled on the SAFE level.
# TFIP-37.1: Authorization of TrueFi Rebrand and Treasury Recapitalization
Due to the holiday period, community participation in this proposal was limited.
Additionally, we identified that the TrueFi DAO Snapshot space was misconfigured and did not enforce a quorum requirement. As a result, TFIP-37 appears as passed on Snapshot; however, from a governance perspective, it did not meet the 5% quorum requirement established under TFIP-16.
We will address this configuration issue promptly and implement the 5% staked TRU quorum rule as intended.
Accordingly, we have decided to resubmit TFIP-37.1 under the same terms as the original proposal.
# Summary
This proposal requests community approval to rebrand the TrueFi project and to mint the remaining TRU token supply to fund this transition and future growth.
Over the past year, the Board and Foundation have worked to clean up legacy issues, stabilize operations, and build new products. However, the TrueFi brand continues to carry reputational baggage from earlier eras that no longer reflect the team, the technology, or the direction of the project.
A rebrand allows the protocol to retain its technology (including Cyan, the TrueFi vault architecture, and the stablecoin/CDP system) while cleanly separating from the legacy identity that has become a significant headwind to growth and business development.
# Background
TrueFi has gone through substantial internal transformation in the last 12 months. The current contributors have:
Streamlined governance and operations
Consolidated technical assets
Integrated Cyan
Developed a stablecoin and CDP architecture
Improved financial discipline
Invested in modernizing the infrastructure
These improvements position the project for renewed growth. However, despite this progress, the brand itself remains one of the largest obstacles.
# The Problem: The TrueFi Brand No Longer Represents the Project
The reputation TrueFi accumulated from 2020–2023 (governance disputes, misaligned incentives, unresolved forum discussions, contributor turnover, and loan disputes from teams long gone) continues to resurface despite the current team’s clean track record.
This manifests in several ways:
BD conversations that begin with legacy concerns unrelated to today’s contributors
Questions on socials about events that occurred years ago under prior teams
Negative associations that overshadow new products and integrations
Confusion about which groups or technologies are still part of the project
Community members repeatedly asking why the protocol has not rebranded
The brand has become a structural drag on credibility, growth, hiring, partnerships, and even basic communications.
The technology is strong.
The team is aligned.
The opportunity is real.
**The brand is a bottleneck.**
A clean slate solves this.
# Rationale for Rebranding
**The Community Has Actively Requested a Rebrand**
Multiple members of the Telegram community have raised the idea of rebranding, recognizing that the legacy issues are not going away and continue to distract from the work actually being built today.
This proposal formalizes that discussion and acknowledges the community’s input.
**The Brand Carries Reputational Baggage That No Longer Reflects Reality**
Despite the current team’s work to fix the past, nearly all external conversations still surface history that:
The current contributors did not create
The current Board has already resolved or addressed
The technology stack no longer reflects
This creates unnecessary friction for BD, partnerships, liquidity collaborators, and ecosystem conversations.
A Unified Brand Enables the Project to Present Its Technology as a Cohesive System
We now operate:
Cyan (NFT-backed lending)
TrueFi vault infrastructure
A stablecoin and CDP system
Off-chain borrower evaluation and credit primitives
These should sit under one coherent brand, not fragmented legacy naming.
**The Rebrand Allows Us to Move Forward Without Dragging the Past Along**
The rebrand is not about erasing history (the TrueFi forum will remain, but separately for legacy discussions) but about building a project that can grow without constantly answering for events unrelated to the present.
This creates:
A clear identity
A cleaner narrative
A more credible BD posture
A healthier environment for tokenholders
A fresh foundation for everything we build next
# The Rebrand Requires Resources: Treasury Recapitalization
Executing a proper rebrand and transition (including audits, documentation, business development, integrations, design work, communications, and ongoing operational continuity) requires adequate funding. Minting the remaining TRU supply does not change the maximum token supply, was always contemplated in the original token design, and provides the balance-sheet capital necessary to execute this transition responsibly. This recapitalization ensures that the project can move forward without compromise and with the resources needed to complete the rebrand effectively..
# Scope of This Proposal
**1. Approve a Full Rebrand of the Protocol**
This includes:
Developing a new project name and identity
Updating documentation, branding, and public interfaces
Migrating active governance, engineering, and communications to the new brand
Retaining the TrueFi forum for historical and claims-related matters
**2. Mint the Remaining TRU Supply Into the Treasury**
Funds will support:
Rebrand execution
Operational continuity
BD and liquidity partner engagement
Engineering, audits, and integrations
Communications and documentation updates
Additional liquidity for Cyan, lending vaults, stablecoin, and CDP infrastructure
**3. Establish the Operational Framework for the Brand Transition**
The transition will include coordinating contributors around a unified rebrand plan, updating all public documentation and technical materials to reflect the new identity, preparing communication packages for partners and ecosystem participants, and ensuring that Cyan, the vault architecture, and the stablecoin/CDP systems are properly represented under the new brand.
This framework also includes planning the sequence of interface updates, consolidating governance and communication channels, and managing the rollout of the new brand across all user- and developer-facing surfaces. This proposal focuses exclusively on the brand transition and does not authorize any token migration or reconstitution, which would require separate governance action if pursued.
**4. Resume and Complete Critical Technical Workstreams**
As part of the brand transition and in preparation for renewed growth, several technical initiatives that were previously paused due to funding and prioritization constraints will be resumed and completed.
This includes restarting the external audit process for Elara V1, which had been paused during earlier stages of the project. Completing this audit is a prerequisite for deploying Elara as a production-grade system and for engaging with partners that require formally reviewed smart contract infrastructure. In parallel, the CDP architecture will undergo its own independent audit to ensure the security, correctness, and robustness of the system before broader usage.
In addition, work on KYC and AML integrations (which had also been paused) will be resumed. These integrations are necessary to support compliant counterparties, enable broader participation in the protocol’s products, and ensure the infrastructure can support institutional and regulated use cases as adoption increases.
Finally, additional capital will be allocated to support early-stage liquidity requirements across the protocol’s products. This includes ensuring sufficient liquidity is available to support initial usage, testing, and partner onboarding, without relying on ad hoc or reactive measures.
Together, these workstreams ensure that the protocol’s technical foundations, compliance capabilities, and liquidity posture are aligned with the expectations of a modern, growth-oriented on-chain financial platform.
**Implementation Timeline (3–5 Weeks)**
**Week 0–1:**
Mint remaining TRU into the treasury
Begin final brand development, naming, and design
Prepare updated documentation and transition plan
**Week 2–3:**
Announce new brand identity
Begin migration of public-facing interfaces, documentation, and communication channels
**Week 3–5:**
Complete migration to new brand
Provide transparency report on treasury usage and remaining runway
Publish updated BD, partner, and technical documentation under new brand
# Next Governance Steps
As this proposal does not fall under simplified governance exemptions, it must follow the full governance process:
**Forum Posting (72 hours):**
Community discussion and feedback period.
**Snapshot Vote (48 hours):**
Options:
OK to vote on Tally
Not OK to vote on Tally
Abstain
A minimum of 5% of staked TRU is required for quorum.
**Amendment Period (72 hours):**
If quorum is met but “Not OK to vote on Tally” receives the majority, the proposal enters a 72-hour amendment and discussion window before moving forward.
**Tally Vote:**
If Snapshot passes (or the amendment period concludes), the proposal proceeds to Tally for a binding on-chain vote.
# Conclusion
TFIP-37 initiates a straightforward but essential step: separating the future of the protocol from the legacy of the TrueFi brand.
This allows the community to focus on what has actually been built (modern credit primitives, NFT-backed lending, stablecoin/CDP infrastructure, and a unified technology stack) rather than continuously answering for a past that no longer reflects the team, the products, or the direction of the project.
The combination of a clean brand and a properly funded treasury gives the protocol the best possible foundation for growth.
# TFIP-36: Proposal to Update Signer on TrueFi Multisig Wallets
# Summary
This proposal seeks to update one of the signers on three TrueFi multisig wallets:
* Foundation Payroll multisig - 0xC2636A948a730D4578E07c36aFc6f8A8Fef59Df1
* Plume multisig - 0xCd130E5833a7A30BcADBDB57DFc7aC88d2F8b572
* New Treasury multisig - 0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b
for operational continuity and to reflect the current availability of participants. Specifically, we propose replacing the current signer Vivek at address 0x622a48841fC326C4C60d3008bACc1a13011Af624 with Goblin at a new address 0x2ac4a7daD1eE2eACfA3E90dd6C69466CC66Df7B2.
# Motivation
TrueFi DAO relies on a multisig for executing DAO-approved transactions and maintaining control over treasury assets. To ensure the multisig continues to function securely and efficiently, it’s important to keep signer addresses up to date. This change ensures that all participants remain active and reachable at their signing address.
# Specification
Replace the existing signer on the TrueFi DAO Treasury Gnosis Safe, TrueFi Foundation Payroll Gnosis Safe, and TrueFi DAO Plume Gnosis Safe:
Remove: Vivek – 0x622a48841fC326C4C60d3008bACc1a13011Af624, 0xA8a9c3CB60dc5EE59464883Af56Ae8511B13C9F6
Add: Goblin – 0x2ac4a7daD1eE2eACfA3E90dd6C69466CC66Df7B2
There will be no change to the total number of signers or the signing threshold.
# Next Steps
1. Tally vote: The proposal will be posted on Tally for the final vote. 
2. To memorialize the proposal on Tally, 1 TRU will be transferred from Timelock contract to the TrueFi Foundation New Treasury.
3. The replacement will be handled on the SAFE level.
# [TFIP-35.1] Budget Proposal Q1 2026 - Reworked
## Context
Dear TrueFi Community,
We would like to acknowledge that this proposal was previously posted but did not pass. Participation during that voting window was unusually low, and the feedback we did receive (primarily through Telegram and direct conversations) was broadly supportive. The lack of forum engagement and the timing over the holiday period likely contributed to the muted on-chain turnout. With that in mind, we are reposting this proposal with the same structure, added clarity, and a renewed commitment to open discussion on the forum.
Importantly, this is a **single-quarter budget** designed to maintain operational continuity while we activate the ecosystem’s product lines. By keeping the request to three months of funding, we ensure that the DAO retains flexibility and that the Foundation remains accountable to delivering measurable progress. We will return to the community in the next budget cycle with **granular reporting, updated KPIs, and clear evidence of execution** across Cyan, Elara, credit markets, and the revamped product stack
Over the past year, the Foundation has focused on stabilizing the TrueFi ecosystem, resolving legacy issues, and rebuilding the operational base inherited from the prior handover. When the protocol transitioned from Archblock, several technical and administrative components were incomplete or outdated. This included aging multisig structures, unavailable signers, unclear ownership of wallets, and a dependency on vendors who were no longer actively involved. These challenges slowed development and forced the team to spend time on cleanup rather than forward progress.
Despite these constraints, the Foundation has made meaningful progress. We have reduced total operating expenses by more than fifty percent, streamlined internal systems, completed a full reskin of the TrueFi front end, and implemented the Keyring KYC system that allows accredited lenders to access on-chain credit markets. For context, the Foundation’s average monthly spend in 2024, driven largely by external service providers, was over **$400,000**. In 2025, we reduced that figure to approximately **$150,000**, *even after accounting for one-time legal expenses and the development of stablecoin intellectual property*. This marks a decisive shift toward a leaner, more sustainable operating model. Most importantly, we have finished the internal restructuring required to move from a repair cycle into a growth cycle.
We are now ready to activate the products the ecosystem has built and begin generating visible traction. This budget proposal is designed to support the first phase of that growth. It focuses on measured, revenue positive deployment of capital across our three active product lines. Each initiative is designed to create productive, compounding capital for the protocol rather than discretionary spend or burn.
***
## Current Status & Budget Performance
Following the approval of the previous budget proposal ([TFIP-28](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/truefi/proposal/79805134100933429654464404197660116470858197125645356456400459034002613069198)), TrueFi DAO successfully funded six months of core operational activity throughout Q3 and Q4 2025. This included governance, strategic operations, product development, legal alignment, and community engagement.
All spending during this period has been transparently tracked and reported on a quarterly basis. The most recent updates, including departmental KPI summaries and expense breakdowns, are available to the public via the DAO’s Notion dashboard:
<img height="20" width="20" alt=":page_facing_up:" title=":page_facing_up:" src="https://emoji.discourse-cdn.com/twitter/page_facing_up.png?v=15" /> [TrueFi DAO Q3 2025 Report](https://truefi-protocol.notion.site/truefi-dao-q3-2025-report?pvs=74)
Despite market volatility, our contributors remained fiscally disciplined, navigating budget execution with efficiency. We prioritized critical milestones—such as onboarding new technical talent, completing the UI/UX reskin, transitioning IT infrastructure in-house, and progressing with Elara’s spin-out—while preserving capital for strategic flexibility.
As we approach the end of Q4 2025, and taking into account all forecasted expenditures for the remainder of the year, we anticipate the following treasury balance:
* **USDT Reserve**: 49,680 USDT
This remaining reserve reflects the careful management of DAO funds over the last six months and leaves us well-positioned to continue core operations into Q1 2026, pending approval of this proposal.
***
## Budget Request for Q1 2026
**Total requested budget: $489,850**
1. This proposal requests three **months of operating expenses** to support core functions such as **governance, operational costs, and community initiatives**. The budget accounts for the necessary funding to maintain operational stability and strategic development, with an estimated total of **$489,850** for the upcoming 3 months.
2. The proposed budget will take a **~30% earmark in TRU’s token price at the execution of the proposal** before being swapped into stablecoins. This is to account for price fluctuations before the TRU-to-USDC/USDT conversion.
3. Any excess funds will be [reported](https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzIzN2MyOTItNTJkNi00ZWIxLWJkOTQtNGViY2U0NWZhZThhIiwidCI6ImZkZTUwOWIwLWY5NTgtNGYzMC1hYzA3LWFmMDA4ZWUwZjEzMyIsImMiOjl9) to the DAO at the end of the three months.
This figure includes ongoing operational costs as well as necessary back payments and strategic hires as detailed below. The budget structure remains consistent with previous frameworks to preserve clarity and predictability.
### 1. **Cyan (NFT Lending Platform)**
**Budget: $25,000 (Investment vehicle)**
Cyan is live today and already generating revenue. The product is strongly positioned within the NFT financing vertical and has seen organic usage with no external spend. The next step is to elevate Cyan’s visibility. We plan to run a targeted marketing campaign in partnership with key NFT communities, focused on driving borrow and lend activity with positive unit economics. For example, a user who finances a Pudgy Penguin through Cyan may receive a small amount of PENGU tokens only after initiating a loan. In all cases, the protocol earns revenue first and distributes incentives second. This ensures the marketing spend is net positive and directly tied to Cyan adoption.
### 2. **TrueFi Credit Vaults**
**Budget: $100,000 (Investment vehicle)**
The TrueFi reskin and Keyring KYC integration are currently code complete and in user acceptance testing. This positions us to relaunch institutional lending activity on the platform. To rebuild trust with external lenders, the Foundation proposes to deposit a modest amount of capital into select vaults and co-lend alongside institutional borrowers. This creates alignment, increases confidence in loan execution, and accelerates the return of lending volume. The yield earned flows back to the Foundation, making this a productive capital allocation rather than a cost.
### 3. **Elara CDP (Capital Efficient Yield Product)**
**Budget: $25,000 (Investment vehicle)**
The original Elara concept was a compliant Treasury-backed stablecoin. While the product was built and the IP remains fully owned by the DAO, the broader market environment made this design impractical without significant venture funding. Multiple projects in the same category faced similar challenges. Given this reality, we have pivoted Elara to a CDP model that supports capital-efficient sUSDe looping. This variant is much more aligned with current market demand and can generate meaningful returns with a modest liquidity base.
The CDP architecture is nearly complete. To support launch and testing, the Foundation requests a budget allocation that allows us to seed initial liquidity. This is not marketing spend or discretionary spend. It is productive capital that generates yield and contributes to the beginning of a permanent capital base for TrueFi owned liquidity.
### 4. Legal
**Budget: $7,500**
**Objectives:**
* Implement necessary legal modifications to TrueFi Foundation Ltd.
### 5. Finance, Treasury and Operations
**Budget: $40,000**
**Includes:**
* CFO (x1): $40,000
**Objectives:**
* Maintain core finance operations, including DAO-level bookkeeping, centralized payments, and monthly cost control reviews.
* Coordinate with legal team to assess how regulatory changes could impact fiscal procedures.
* Manage day-to-day operations, including onboarding and offboarding procedures, and oversee IT infrastructure at the operational level
* Support all other departments
**KPIs:**
* Zero late payments; Quarterly reporting published via DAO Report
* Quarterly financial report to community
* Monthly financial report to board
* Internal DAO guide created for future treasury strategy iterations.
### 6. **Strategy & Operations**
**Budget: $49,000**
**Includes:**
* Board Members (x4): $24,000
* Head of Strategy (x1): $25,000
**Objectives:**
* Sustain day-to-day operations management and enhance governance and contributor coordination.
* Provide governance oversight, strategic planning, and operational coordination.
* Execute strategic roadmap, aligning product, legal, and finance streams.
* Manage day-to-day operational continuity and reporting cadence.
**KPIs:**
* Governance cadence maintained (forum, Snapshot, Tally).
* Strategic input documented for each major initiative (legal, dev, finance).
### 7. **Research & Analysis**
**Budget: $37,500**
**Includes:**
* Head of Research (x1): $37,500
**Objectives:**
* Provide foundational market and competitive research.
* Support financial and treasury strategy with analysis and benchmarks.
### 8. Product & Development
**Budget: $156,250**
**Includes:**
* Head of Product (x1): $37,500
* Full-Stack Engineers (x2): $100,000
* Developer (x1): $18,750
### 9. IT Infrastructure
**Budget: $15,000**
**Objectives:**
* Fully internalized IT infrastructure (e.g., GitHub, Gitbook, Cloudflare, INFURA, Heroku).
### 10. Marketing & Community
**Budget: $34,600**
**Includes:**
* Marketer (x1): $25,000
* Community Moderator (x1): $9,600
**Objectives:**
* Amplify TrueFi and Elara and Cyan presence in web3 media, through long-form content, podcast appearances, and ecosystem collaborations.
* Drive forward community-led initiatives that increase ecosystem stickiness and TRU retention.
* Optimize budget allocation for industry events, targeting ROI-positive opportunities only.
**KPIs:**
* One thought leadership piece published each month.
* Two high-quality speaking engagements secured by year-end.
* Quarterly DAO report Town hall call
***
### Summary Budget Table
| **Cost Center** | **Q1 2026** |
| --------------------- | ------------ |
| Cyan Investment | $25,000 |
| TrueFi Credit Vaults | $100,000 |
| Elara CDP | $25,000 |
| Legal | $7,500 |
| Finance & Operations | $40,000 |
| Strategy & Operations | $49,000 |
| Research & Analysis | $37,500 |
| Product & Development | $156,250 |
| IT Infrastructure | $15,000 |
| Marketing & Community | $34,600 |
| **Total** | **$489,850** |
### **Operational Budget in USD:**
| **Position/Item** | **Annual** | **Q1 2026** |
| ------------------------- | ---------- | ------------ |
| Head of Product (x1) | $150,000 | $37,500 |
| Head of Research (x1) | $150,000 | $37,500 |
| Head of Strategy (x1) | $100,000 | $25,000 |
| Full Stack Engineers (x2) | $400,000 | $100,000 |
| Developer (x1) | $150,000 | $18,750 |
| IT Infrastructure | $45,000 | $15,000 |
| Marketer (x1) | $100,000 | $25,000 |
| Directors Fees (x5) | $96,000 | $24,000 |
| Community Moderator (x1) | $38,400 | $9,600 |
| Legal and Compliance | - | $7,500 |
| Finance & Operations | $160,000 | $40,000 |
| **Total Expenses** | | **$339,850** |
***
## Proposal Summary
| **Details** | **Q1 2026** |
| ----------------------------- | ------------------ |
| Projected Operational Cost | $489,850 |
| Reallocation from the TFIP-28 | -$49,680 |
| Budget Funding request | $440,170 |
| ~30% earmark | $132,051 |
| Total Funding request | $572,221 |
| TRU price | $0,014 |
| **TRU minting request** | **40,872,928 TRU** |
***
## **Goals Enabled by TFIP-35.1**
This budget proposal is designed to support a clear transition. The past year has been about stabilizing the protocol, cleaning up inherited systems, and finishing the work needed to unlock TrueFi’s product suite. The next phase is about growth, proof points, and showing the community that TrueFi is back in motion.
Each component of the proposed budget directly supports revenue generation, as well as product development. Cyan incentives are deployed only after revenue is earned. TrueFi co-lending is productive capital that yields returns. Elara liquidity is the foundation for a CDP product that has strong demand and favorable economics. None of these expenditures leave the ecosystem. They are investments into assets the DAO owns and controls.
Our goal is to demonstrate clear progress from Q4 through April of next year. By that point, we expect to show measurable traction across Cyan, TrueFi, and Elara, supported by a lean operational base and real on-chain activity.
Currently, the team is focused on
At that stage, the community can decide whether to expand the growth plan further. For now, we believe these targeted and disciplined allocations are the right scale for a sustainable restart.
We appreciate the continued support of the community and look forward to delivering results.
***
## **Next Governance Steps**
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
**1. Tally Vote:** Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-34] Foundation Update: Wallet Recovery and Treasury Consolidation
### **Summary:**
As mentioned in the Q3 DAO report, part of the Foundation’s ongoing cleanup initiatives has involved an analysis of legacy TrueFi wallets and smart contracts. We have concluded reviewing historical DAO wallets to ensure that all on-chain assets are properly accounted for and managed under Foundation oversight.
During this process, several legacy wallets were identified and handed over to the Foundation. After verifying ownership and confirming that the balances were idle and not linked to any active operations or obligations, we plan to claim these assets to fund ongoing Foundation activities and support DAO operations.
Below is the **final overview list** following the latest verification and updates:
| **Wallet Name** | **Wallet Address** | **Owner** | **Asset** | **Network** | **Balance** |
| ----------------- | -------------------------------------------- | ---------- | --------- | ----------- | ----------- |
| Revenue Wallet | `0xEEECA18FF2EEA7663f6E6348fAfc859958d7Cb99` | TrueFi DAO | USDC | Arbitrum | 3,564 |
| Revenue Wallet | `0xEEECA18FF2EEA7663f6E6348fAfc859958d7Cb99` | TrueFi DAO | USDT | Arbitrum | 1,041 |
| Revenue Wallet | `0xEEECA18FF2EEA7663f6E6348fAfc859958d7Cb99` | TrueFi DAO | ARB | Arbitrum | 45,000 |
| Protocol Treasury | `0x863461596aB57b91B873b26D4F0a701a9703B9Ca` | TrueFi DAO | USDC | Ethereum | 32,008 |
| Protocol Treasury | `0x863461596aB57b91B873b26D4F0a701a9703B9Ca` | TrueFi DAO | TRU | Ethereum | 188,074 |
| | | | | | |
> \*\*Note:\*\*The previously listed wallets “Loan Rating Rewards – Distributor” and “Rating Loans” were found to **belong to the legacy TrueFi ecosystem** and are **not under DAO ownership or control**. These wallets are therefore excluded from this proposal.
The **Revenue Wallet** on Arbitrum remains part of the consolidation effort; however, this **Tally vote will not trigger any direct on-chain action**. The wallet is a **3-out-of-6 multisignature address**, originally used to receive the Arbitrum grant and subsequently to collect protocol and product fees from the Arbitrum network.
This vote grants the Foundation the **mandate to recover these funds** and to **re-establish control over this multisig** in alignment with current governance and operational structures.
The **stkTRU Distributor** will receive later contract upgrades as part of another Tally package proposal.
***
### **Rationale**
This initiative aligns with our broader goals of:
* Streamlining wallet management and improving transparency
* Consolidating DAO-controlled assets to simplify treasury operations
* Supporting continued development and ecosystem growth as we approach Elara’s launch
The total of these balances will be transferred into **Foundation-managed wallets** for operational use, where they will remain **fully visible and traceable on-chain**.
All transfers will go to the existing multi-signature wallet already used for Foundation operations:
**New Treasury — 0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b**
***
### **Additional Context**
The Foundation continues to work diligently to **repair and organize legacy infrastructure** inherited from prior entities that administered TrueFi.
As with this effort, what may appear as a simple operational task often becomes complex due to the **absence of proper handovers, missing documentation, or outdated procedures**.
Despite this, progress is being made systematically to ensure TrueFi’s operations and governance remain transparent, auditable, and compliant moving forward.
# [TFIP-33.1] Update Canceller Signers
### **Summary**
This proposal seeks to update the composition of the Canceller multisignature wallet by creating a new 4/5 multisignature wallet with the updated slate of engaged Board and community members, and by transferring Canceller rights to this new wallet. This approach mirrors the precedent set in TFIP-16 and ensures timely and reliable execution of Canceller responsibilities.
***
### **Abstract**
In TFIP-16, a new 4/6 multisignature wallet was created at 0x38358B194A863d40677D774823e6Fc922a100471, and Canceller rights were revoked from the previous wallet (0x8c8FcA3812c4272756120E207D3ED496A73Bc528) and granted to the new one.
More recently, TFIP-33 proposed updating the signer composition of the Canceller wallet. However, the execution of TFIP-33 on Tally did not produce the intended changes because the Timelock contract cannot directly alter the composition of a Gnosis Safe multisignature wallet.
To resolve this issue and ensure the Canceller remains both independent and functional, the most effective and expedient approach is to replicate the process from TFIP-16:
* Deploy a new 4/5 multisignature wallet with the updated slate of signers - 0x950183164888F9c51A05D0906202B75F7309Cf09
* Revoke Canceller rights from the existing wallet (0x38358B194A863d40677D774823e6Fc922a100471).
* Grant Canceller rights to the newly created wallet. (0x950183164888F9c51A05D0906202B75F7309Cf09)
This ensures that the Canceller role is held by an active, responsive, and reliable group of participants.
**Proposed New Slate of Canceller Signers (4/5)**
* Ferengi \[Board Member] - 0x25022f216b97641d396e6Efe68ba45F80AD7A56b
* Krysh Patel \[Board Member] - 0x1CcD47778a28e641df3BbA23fe9d802c4F6c150b
* Romain Rechtman \[Board Member] - 0x5E7bDb4878d28a4883aDe19d5E96203B8C323393
* Stefan Tanase \[TrueFi Finance] - 0x5D545DE6e81da180dBbb57926a0e49be7c868Fb7
* Sebastien Davies \[Board Member] - 0x97F8De405D7e70c0F66c2308d9882A9227097d6f
***
### **Next Steps**
1. **Create New Multisignature Wallet**
The candidates have deployed a new 4/5 Gnosis Safe wallet with the proposed signer set. - 0x950183164888F9c51A05D0906202B75F7309Cf09
1. **Tally Proposal Actions**
* **Revoke Role**: Revoke Canceller rights from the current wallet (0x38358B194A863d40677D774823e6Fc922a100471).
`revokeRole("0xfd643c72710c63c0180259aba6b2d05451e3591a24e58b62239378085726f783", "0x38358B194A863d40677D774823e6Fc922a100471")`
* **Grant Role**: Grant Canceller rights to the new multisignature wallet.
`grantRole("0xfd643c72710c63c0180259aba6b2d05451e3591a24e58b62239378085726f783", "0x950183164888F9c51A05D0906202B75F7309Cf09")`
**Implementation** 
Upon a successful Forum proposal, the final proposal will be brought to all stkTRU holders for an on-chain vote on Tally. If approved, the necessary actions will be executed automatically with the Canceller role will be transferred to the multi-signature wallet controlled by the Independent Board of Directors and the mentioned individuals.
# [TFIP-33] Update Canceller Signers
Over the past several months, the composition of our canceller signers has not kept pace with the evolving makeup of the TrueFi community. A number of the current signers are no longer active participants, which creates challenges around timely responses when urgent action is required.
While it remains important to have independent participants serving as signers, it is equally critical that those individuals are engaged members of the community who can be relied upon to respond promptly. To that end, I propose we update the slate of signers to reflect the current set of Board members as outlined in TFIP-16.
# Proposed New Slate of Canceller Signers
Ferengi \[Board Member]
Krysh Patel \[Board Member]
Romain Rechtman \[Board Member]
Stefan Tanase \[TrueFi Finance)
Sebastien Davies \[Board Member]
This proposal is intended to ensure that the canceller remains both independent and functional, with signers who are present and responsive.
# Next Governance Steps
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
Tally Vote: Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-32] Extending Directors Term to March 31st, 2026
Preface:
Current Directors
As per TFIP-17, (\[TFIP-17] Extending the TrueFi Foundation Board of Directors - #5 by vandynathan) voted in September 2024, there are five directors Ferengi, Krysh, Seb Davies, Romain Rechtman, and Nathan Vandy. The directors’ term is set to end on September 30th 2025 or earlier if a director resigns.
Given that there is a need for leadership stability at least at the directorship level, I propose that a majority of the directors be given an extension to March 31st, 2026. The original TFIP-17 provided for a simple governance guideline vote to extend only to Dec 31st, 2025. However, a longer period and a non-year-end holiday period timing for individual director re-elections I believe is better.
Proposal:
This TFIP provides the extension for four out of the five directors elected or had their term extended last September 2024 below:
Romain Rechtman
Sebastion Davies
Krysh Type3
Ferengi
Please see their original Board Candidate proposals here:
Dear Community, I am very thankful to be considered for a seat on the Board. My background is a mix of traditional finance, fintech and crypto. After post graduate studies in France, I started my career in Hong Kong marketing structured products for JPMorgan. I then joined Goldman Sachs to cover Hedge Funds. After 8 years in Hong Kong I continued my career in the US back at JPMorgan and then London, this time at HSBC, in a similar director position. Overall my 15 years in banking made me rea…
TL;DR: Over Three Years in Digital Assets: Extensive experience in both traditional and decentralized finance, with a focus on innovative financial products and secure ecosystems. VP, Research & Market Strategist at Aquanow: Played a key role in scaling operations, managing complexity, and delivering insights into the digital asset landscape. Yield Fund Experience: Involved in launching a yield fund with a mix of over-collateralized crypto loans, trading strategies, and DeFi exposure. Strategi…
Thank you for your application, it is really appreciated.
Summary This statement presents Ferengi’s candidacy for a Board Member position at the TrueFi DAO Foundation. It delineates the motivation, qualifications, contributions, and envisioned compensation for the role, leveraging my extensive experience in DeFi, particularly in lending markets and DAO operations. Motivation The Board Member role is pivotal in steering TrueFi DAO towards its strategic goals. The Foundation’s limited yet critical responsibilities, including supporting protocol decent…
The new Directorship Term End is proposed here to be now March 31st, 2026.
The Compensation and Commitment for the Director Roles will be unchanged at:
A monthly retainer of $2,000 for basic responsibilities, covering up to 4 hours of work per week (paid in stables or TRU)
Beyond the basic retainer, additional work and operational duties will be billed at a rate of $200 per hour
In the case where this proposal is not voted through:
If this proposal is not passed, then the term of the directors may end on September 30th 2025, and a follow up simple extension proposal will be posted for an extension of the existing board members if and at such time to December 31st 2025.
To memorialize the proposal on Tally, 8,000 USDC (1 month of director fees) will be withdrawn from Timelock contract to the Truefi Foundation Operational Treasury address.
Next Governance Steps
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
Forum Posting: A 72-hour posting period on the forum to allow the community to provide feedback.
Snapshot Vote: A 48-hour Snapshot vote will be conducted with the options: “OK to vote on Tally,” “Not OK to vote on Tally,” and “Abstain.” At least 5% of staked TRU must participate in this Snapshot vote to meet the quorum.
Amendment Period: If the 5% quorum is met, with a majority negative vote, a 72-hour period will follow to allow for any amendments or discussions before the proposal is posted to Tally.
Tally Vote: Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-31] Expanding and Specifying powers of the Foundation (Vaults)
Preface:
The Foundation
Previously the Truefi Foundation (“TF”) on its formation was granted limited enumerated powers and such powers to be exercised by votes the the Board of Directors (“BOD”). Since then, the Foundation has expanded its operations as many functions have been brought in-house from outside service vendors.
Vaults
Since 2022, various credit vaults have been introduced and its display and the process of how it is categorized on the Truefi UI has not been formalised. For example, if a vault has been introduced by a credit manager or service provider which no longer is contracted, then there is no procedure to label the vault for the information benefit of the platform users. (As there can be a case where a vault maturity extends beyond a credit manager or service provider’s contracted relationship with the DAO).
Enumerated Powers
The Foundation’s Enumerated Powers of the Foundation might currently provide relevant powers in the case of vaults allowing the Foundation to:
A. Manage off-chain corporate responsibilities and
B. Act as the initial administrative agent in TrueFi’s decentralized lending architecture to pursue defaults unless DAO members approve an alternative administrative agent.
Author: Michael Bland Progressive Decentralization of TrueFi to Date TrueFi was created to become the open-source financial infrastructure for facilitating uncollateralized lending of digital assets. Since its launch in November 2020, the core team has been executing on a progressive decentralization step plan for turning the ownership, control, and future development of the protocol over to the community through the creation of the TrueFi DAO (the “DAO”). From the start, TrueFi has sought to…
Proposal:
This TFIP looks to expand the Foundation’s powers to allow for it to administer non-defaulted vaults at its discretion where there is not a clear (continuing) mandate on managing such vaults from the DAO. Actions to adminster such vaults may include actions by the Foundatin or BOD to:
Contact borrowers to return funds in a timely manner upon maturity and if lenders are known, to remind them upon receipt of funds to withdraw such funds from the vault
Moving the vault links to a special section of the Truefi Platorm website and label them, likely once closed to move vault links to a legacy-closed webpage or similar
Potentially restructure the vaults for non-default matters such as chain migration or stablecoin migration
And any other actions deemed necessary by the Foundation BOD in respect to such Vaults.
As there is no immediate funding requirement I believe for this, this TFIP, if passed can be memorialised by withdrawing 5,000 USDC from the Timelock contract to the foundation as an initial buffer to handle such contingencies by the BOD.
Next Governance Steps
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
Forum Posting: A 72-hour posting period on the forum to allow the community to provide feedback.
Snapshot Vote: A 48-hour Snapshot vote will be conducted with the options: “OK to vote on Tally,” “Not OK to vote on Tally,” and “Abstain.” At least 5% of staked TRU must participate in this Snapshot vote to meet the quorum.
Amendment Period: If the 5% quorum is met, with a majority negative vote, a 72-hour period will follow to allow for any amendments or discussions before the proposal is posted to Tally.
Tally Vote: Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# TFIP-30: Proposal to Update Signer on the TrueFi DAO Treasury Multisig
**Summary**
This proposal seeks to update one of the signers on the TrueFi DAO Treasury multisig for operational continuity and to reflect the current availability of participants. Specifically, we propose replacing the current signer Vivek at address `0x622a48841fC326C4C60d3008bACc1a13011Af624` with Vivek at a new address `0xA8a9c3CB60dc5EE59464883Af56Ae8511B13C9F6`.
**Motivation**
TrueFi DAO relies on a multisig for executing DAO-approved transactions and maintaining control over treasury assets. To ensure the multisig continues to function securely and efficiently, it’s important to keep signer addresses up to date. This change ensures that all participants remain active and reachable at their signing address.
**Specification**
Replace the existing signer on the TrueFi DAO Treasury Gnosis Safe:
* **Remove:** Vivek – `0x622a48841fC326C4C60d3008bACc1a13011Af624`
* **Add:** Vivek – `0xA8a9c3CB60dc5EE59464883Af56Ae8511B13C9F6`
There will be no change to the total number of signers or the signing threshold.
**Next Steps**
If this proposal is approved, the multisig will be updated accordingly, and the new signer will begin participating in multisig approvals going forward.
**Vote**
For: Approve the proposed signer replacement
Against: Do not approve the proposed signer replacement
# [TFIP-29] Funding Request to build TrueFi into a premier RWA Stablecoin protocol
**Who is Cyan?**
Cyan, a lending platform utilizing NFT technology, aims to position TrueFi as a premier RWA Stablecoin platform amidst the imminent $10 trillion TAM influx.
Cyan was established in early 2022 and has a team of 4 dedicated professionals. The team comprises a visionary and project manager, a senior blockchain developer, a senior full-stack developer, and a junior full-stack developer. We offer the Cyan Wallet, a unique smart contract wallet escrow solution that no other lending platform provides. Cyan is also the first protocol to introduce the “Buy Now, Pay Later” (BNPL) concept to NFTs.
To date, Cyan has facilitated close to $25 million in loan volumes, with vaults returning yields between 25-40%. Our protocol has been safely running for 1,142 days and has been audited by Quantstamp, Certik, 0xQuit, and other independent auditors. We were among the first to offer RWA loans, with the first proof-of-concept being Pokémon cards.
Cyan has spent the past three years building a robust lending protocol for an asset class affected by hype and unfortunate timing. As the narrative for RWAs grows, NFTs will regain importance. The team identified TrueFi as an ideal partner, given the project’s strong reputation and impressive community. By working with Cyan, TrueFi will benefit from proven vault and lending technology.
[<img height="386" width="690" alt="TFIP-29 Submission" src="https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/truefi/optimized/1X/9f8e47d4a15f377351fccc5aca1bedd5450edf0b_2_690x386.jpeg" />TFIP-29 Submission1920×1076 103 KB](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/truefi/original/1X/9f8e47d4a15f377351fccc5aca1bedd5450edf0b.jpeg "TFIP-29 Submission")
**State of TrueFi:**
2024 was a challenging year due to a lack of liquidity and overall risk aversion. However, 2025 has seen a reversal of this trend with the general awareness of cryptocurrency in developed nations, David Sar as cryptocurrency head in the US, and the SEC dropping many cases related to accusations of projects being securities. Market participants and VCs are now deploying capital into infrastructure in anticipation of traditional finance migrating to the blockchain.
The landscape for credit financing has also changed drastically, with many RWA protocols backed by established institutions entering the market. New protocols such as Ondo Finance, Ethena, Alloy by Tether, and Usual DAO demonstrate a growing appetite for decentralized and transparent stablecoins backed by real-world instruments and strategies.
TrueFi is well-positioned to be a leader in an industry it has helped shape. With the protocol’s strong reputation and smart community, TrueFi deserves to be at the forefront of DeFi.
**How Cyan’s Development Fits with TrueFi:**
Cyan was established in early 2022 by an ex-hedge fund manager and an ex-Googler. As the protocol grew, the team built an NFT lending platform that offered better risk rewards for both the borrower and the lender. Since launching v2, a smart contract wallet was integrated to allow borrowers to control assets while on loan, but not be able to sell or transfer them out.
The protocol is well-suited to facilitate RWA loans through ERC-20, ERC-721, and ERC-1155 onchain assets across mainnet and multiple layer-2s. The benefit is the immediacy of execution by leveraging Cyan’s protocol into TrueFi to create a leading protocol for RWA stablecoins.
RWA stablecoins are a significant movement, with Ethena having $3.5 billion in TVL and the rise of major players like Usual DAO. The potential for RWAs is projected to reach $10 trillion by 2030, with institutions like BlackRock and Fidelity already deploying proofs of concept and dedicated funds. Many RWA protocols are building on top of established non-fungible technologies, which Cyan is well-suited to integrate.
The industry is advancing around ERC-20 technology and will integrate non-fungible solutions (ERC-721, ERC-1155) for financial products in the future. TrueFi, known for its Credit Vaults, is set to benefit from this trend but needs additional yield strategies and a method to back RWA stablecoins to attract more liquidity. Cyan can bridge this gap with its vault technology and smart contract escrow solution.
Moreover, the introduction of Bitcoin ETFs and Ethereum ETFs is rapidly bringing the masses to blockchain, a trend that will continue as traditional finance migrates to on-chain solutions. TrueFi deserves to be at the forefront of this significant shift, capitalizing on these opportunities. To stay relevant and not become obsolete despite its historical success, TrueFi must adapt to these evolving market demands and integrate innovative solutions to maintain its competitive edge.
**Proposal:**
We request 275,000 USD equivalent in TRU to fund the merge and maintenance of the Cyan protocol into the TrueFi protocol for the next 6 months. The funding would come from minting new TRU tokens.
Cyan would like to build the following into the TrueFi dapp:
1. Integrate Cyan’s protocol to bridge credit funding to RWAs as NFTs (ERC-721 & ERC-1155). This will bring new lending opportunities to assets outside of financial instruments, including but not limited to collectibles such as Pokémon cards, Patek Philippe watches, Birkin bags, and more.
2. Rebrand and rebalance the existing Cyan vaults, denominated in USDC, ETH, and APE, into TrueFi to start earning 20%+ yields on existing Cyan lending flow.
3. Maintain vaults and grow TVL to boost activity in the TrueFi community with incentives to stakers.
4. Potentially work with lenders and borrowers to build new collateralized or uncollateralized vaults on non-legacy technology and know-how, leveraging Cyan’s knowledge base of debt vault infrastructure.
If approved, our engagement will formally begin on July 1, 2025, and last until January 31, 2026. The TrueFi protocol may choose to extend the contract upon a community vote and a new proposal from the Cyan team.
The 275,000 USD in equivalent TRU tokens would be allocated as follows:
* 3,571.43 USD per month for vault TVL level maintenance (25,000 USD total)
* 35,714.29 USD per month for the development and management of the protocol (250,000 USD total)
The token payments will be made with an upfront payment of 20% of the contract (55,000 USD) worth in TRU, and the remainder to be a Sablier Stream. As with other contract proposals for TRU, Cyan also requests a 20% buffer for price fluctuations of TRU.
**Deliverables:**
Here is the schedule for deliverables:
* July 2025: Beta version of a new Cyan interface rebranded as TrueFi NFT
* August 2025: Start of airdrop incentive for Vault token holders
* September 2025: Determine PMF and develop a call-overwriting vault
* September ~ November 2025: Extend support for RWA assets and protocols
* December 2025: Review of deliverables, raise a new proposal to continue
**What We Intend to Accomplish:**
If approved, we will immediately start rebranding activities with the existing engineering headcount at Cyan. The focus of this proposal is on the growth and launch of new products to TrueFi to bring the protocol into the RWA and NFT business.
The Cyan protocol has the potential to provide stable revenues every month as long as TVL is maintained. The estimated monthly revenues could reach 10,000 USDC if utilization rates are near 100% at the current TVL of near 700,000 USDC. Revenues will accumulate into the TrueFi Timelock Contract.
Tasks are listed in the [forum post](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-29-funding-request-to-build-truefi-into-a-premier-rwa-stablecoin-protocol-by-cyan/2710) and are also available in an easier-to-digest Google Sheet, which will be available to the community.
**Team:**
Cyan is already equipped with a team of 4 experienced professionals from finance, engineering, blockchain, and consumer products, who will dedicate the next 6 months to TrueFi development. With the acceptance of this proposal, the engineering team will solely focus on merging Cyan into TrueFi. For details on the team, please follow [this link](https://docs.usecyan.com/#/user-guide/extras/team).
The budget will not cover other overhead expenses as we do not have an office, cover travel expenses ourselves, and have an established legal structure in place. The proposed monthly budget for the team is quoted at cost, with no premium added.
**Reporting Expectations:**
Cyan will post bi-weekly updates on the TrueFi Discord server. A detailed update will be provided every quarter on the multiple epics being developed and KPI data around deliverables.
The Google Sheet will serve as a page community members can use to keep up to date on progress.
The Cyan team is available 24/7 to answer any questions on Telegram and Email.
**Out of Scope:**
Cyan’s proposal does not cover the following:
* TrueFi DAO/Foundation legal, compliance, and accounting expenses
* Marketing (e.g., conference sponsorships, X, Discord) or PR expenses
* Core services used by TrueFi DAO, like hosting services, Github, Infura, etc
We are planning to post updates on Telegram to engage with the community at TrueFi.
**Next Governance Steps:**
As the proposal does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
1. Forum Posting: A 72-hour posting period on the forum to allow the community to provide feedback.
2. Snapshot Vote: A 48-hour Snapshot vote will be conducted with the options, “OK to vote on Tally,” “Not OK to vote on Tally,” and “Abstain.” At least 5% of staked TRU must participate in this Snapshot vote to meet the quorum.
3. Amendment Period: If the 5% quorum is met, with a majority negative vote, a 72-hour period will follow to allow for any amendments or discussions before the proposal is posted to Tally.
4. Tally Vote: Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-28] TrueFi Operational Expense Request
# Context & Previous Budget Approval
In TFIP-23, the DAO approved an operational budget for Q2 2025, building upon the lean yet ambitious direction initially established in TFIP-19. These earlier proposals were designed to recalibrate TrueFi’s operational cost structure, bring more core functions in-house, reduce reliance on third-party vendors, and ensure DAO-wide transparency, legal alignment, and financial compliance.
Since implementing these frameworks, the TrueFi core contributors have continued to optimize resource usage while advancing major strategic objectives. This includes completing successful transitions of responsibilities such as IT infrastructure management, making headway in legal restructuring, and establishing a more data-driven governance cadence across departments.
Spending through Q2 2025 has remained within the bounds outlined in TFIP-23. Finalized figures for June 2025 will be published on the TrueFi DAO Report - Q2 2025.
This Q3-Q4 budget proposal is intended to continue fueling the DAO’s long-term vision: efficient and compliant operations, best-in-class DeFi products, and an engaged, value-aligned community. It integrates clear KPIs per workstream, a practice strongly requested by community members, to enhance understanding of department-specific activities.
# Current Status & Budget Performance
At the beginning of Q2 2025, the DAO held a reserve of 55,502 USDT and 3,870,319 TRU, both remaining from TFIP-19. Under TFIP-23, the DAO approved a new operational budget of $497,000 in 17,138,200 TRU. As part of our treasury management decision, we only converted 9,926,875 TRU into USDT (approximately 368,067 USDT) to cover current operational expenses through Q2, awaiting more favorable market conditions to convert the remainder.
By the end of May 2025, actual spending from TFIP-23 funds amounted to 213,000 USDT out of $497,000 budgeted. As of the date of this report, 210,269 USDT and 11,081,644 TRU remain in the new treasury wallet. We forecast June expenditures of 137,938 USDT and plan to restore the operational reserve by converting an additional 128,933 USDT from ~3,348,909 TRU\* at $0.0385/TRU\*.
The Q2 2025 expenditures covered all ongoing operational needs outlined in TFIP-23, as well as several unbudgeted but essential backpayments—most notably related to IT infrastructure previously managed externally. Despite these additional obligations, total spending remains below the approved budget. This outcome reflects our continued commitment to lean financial management, which we intend to maintain going forward as we shift our focus toward the next key objective: increasing TrueFi’s TVL, spinning off Elara Finance, and generating sustainable protocol revenue.
Taking all of the above into account, we expect the treasury status at the end of Q2 to be:
USDT Reserve: 201,264 USDT
Unspent TRU Tokens: 7,732,734 TRU
\*Subject of change based on the TRU price
# Budget Request for Q3 and Q4 2025
### 
Total requested budget: $953,000
This proposal requests six months of operating expenses to support core functions such as governance, operational costs, and community initiatives. The budget accounts for the necessary funding to maintain operational stability and strategic development, with an estimated total of $953,000 for the upcoming 6 months.
The proposed budget will take a ~30% earmark in TRU’s token price at the execution of the proposal before being swapped into stablecoins. This is to account for price fluctuations before the TRU-to-USDC/USDT conversion.
Any excess funds will be reported to the DAO at the end of the three months.
This figure includes ongoing operational costs as well as necessary back payments and strategic hires as detailed below. The budget structure remains consistent with previous frameworks to preserve clarity and predictability.
## Legal Budget: $100,000
### Objectives:
Implement necessary legal modifications to TrueFi Foundation Ltd, including board member transitions and corporate governance updates in line with new BVI regulations.
Finalize the Master Services Agreement (MSA) with Elara to formalize terms of engagement.
Review and adapt internal documentation and obligations to align with evolving jurisdictional requirements in the BVI.
Finalize the incorporation of Elara’s SPVs
### 
KPIs:
Amendments filed and confirmed by Q4 2025.
Signed Elara MSA delivered and made available for DAO transparency.
Delivery of a legal memo summarizing material regulatory shifts in BVI and their implications for DAO operations.
## Finance & Treasury Budget: $82,000
### Includes:
CFO’s (x2): $75,000
Software subscriptions: $7,000
### Objectives:
Maintain core finance operations, including DAO-level bookkeeping, centralized payments, and monthly cost control reviews.
Coordinate with legal team to assess how regulatory changes could impact fiscal procedures.
Prepare and file the BVI Annual Financial Report during Q3 2025.
Support the rollout of an enhanced treasury strategy that includes stablecoin reserve design, RWA integration, and DeFi yield instruments.
KPIs:
Zero late payments; Quarterly reporting published via DAO Report
Q3 financial report and annual submission in BVI completed.
Treasury diversification plan (incl. ~11M TRU minted via TFIP-23).
Internal DAO guide created for future treasury strategy iterations.
## Strategy & Operations Budget: $172,500
### Includes:
Board Members (x5): $60,000
Head of Operations (x1): $75,000
Head of Strategy (x1): $37,500
### Objectives:
Recruit and onboard a Head of Strategy to oversee long-term roadmap planning, cross-stream coordination, and DAO-wide alignment.
Sustain day-to-day operations management and enhance governance and contributor coordination.
Provide governance oversight, strategic planning, and operational coordination.
Execute strategic roadmap, aligning product, legal, and finance streams.
Manage day-to-day operational continuity and reporting cadence.
KPIs:
Governance cadence maintained (forum, Snapshot, Tally).
Strategic input documented for each major initiative (legal, dev, finance).
## Research & Analysis Budget: $93,000
### Includes:
Head of Research (x1): $75,000
Research Analyst (x1): $18,000
### Objectives:
Provide foundational market and competitive research.
Support financial and treasury strategy with analysis and benchmarks.
### KPIs:
We want to increase long form content, quantify growth metrics, improve Dune dashboards, and continue to grow our digital footprint. While most of the work done in Q2 was social media short form and speaking engagements we now want to transition to more fequent coverage of relevant RWA/DeFi protocols
## Product & Development Budget: $404,000
### Includes:
Head of Product (x1): $75,000
Full-Stack Engineers (x2): $200,000
UX/UI Designers ( 1 Team ): $54,000
New Developers (x2): $75,000. Transition starting June 2025
Developer 1: full-stack focused on backend, smart contracts, chain integration
Developer 2: frontend-focused, responsible for UI/UX reskin delivery
### Objectives:
Manage hand-off from Akemona, whose contract ended June 1, 2025, including support during the offboarding phase.
Onboard two new developers with different focus areas: backend/smart contracts (started June 2) and frontend/UI improvements.
Deliver and polish the new UI/UX reskin for TrueFi.
Support marketing and product with consistent design assets.
### KPIs:
Developer 1 contributing to tech debt backlog within one month of start.
Developer 2 operational by end of Q3, focused on delivering full UI/UX reskin.
UI/UX reskin publicly launched before Q4 close.
Full design support for reskin launch (Q4).
Monthly design asset delivery for content and product.
## IT Infrastructure Budget: $30,000
### Objectives:
Fully internalize IT infrastructure, transitioning services previously managed via Archblock (e.g., GitHub, Gitbook, Cloudflare, INFURA, Heroku).
Pay down infra costs covering Q3 and Q4 2025 (~$20,000)
Create a budget for IT Equipment procurement (~$10,000)
### KPIs:
All infrastructure access and billing under DAO control by the start of Q3.
## Marketing & Community Budget: $61,500
### Includes:
Marketer (x1): $50,000
Community Moderator (x1): $1,500
Other marketing costs: $10,000
### Objectives:
Amplify TrueFi and Elara’s presence in web3 media, through long-form content, podcast appearances, and ecosystem collaborations.
Drive forward community-led initiatives that increase ecosystem stickiness and TRU retention.
Optimize budget allocation for industry events, targeting ROI-positive opportunities only.
### KPIs:
One thought leadership piece published each month.
Two high-quality speaking engagements secured by year-end.
Quarterly DAO report Town hall call
## Team Travel for Regional Representation Budget: $10,000
### Includes:
Team Travel: $10,000
### Objectives:
Maintain a minimal conference presence aligning with GTM launch of Elara finance
## Summary Budget Table
| Projected Operational Cost | $953,000 |
| ----------------------------- | --------------- |
| Reallocation from the TFIP-23 | -$297,000 |
| Budget Funding request | $656,000 |
| ~30% earmark | $196,800 |
| Total Funding request | $852,800 |
| TRU price | $0,03761 |
| TRU minting request | ~22,674,820 TRU |
## Goals Enabled by TFIP-28
Full proposal linked in the forum (10k world limit on Snapshot)
## Next Governance Steps
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
Tally Vote: Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-27] Proposal to Update Signers on the TrueFi DAO Treasury Multisig
## Summary
This proposal seeks to update the signers on the TrueFi DAO treasury multisig wallet. Specifically, it aims to remove two current signers and replace them with new, qualified individuals to enhance security, improve responsiveness, and reflect current contributor activity.
## Motivation
The current composition of the TrueFi DAO multisig includes signers who are either no longer active in DAO operations or whose responsibilities have shifted. To maintain the integrity and efficiency of treasury management, it is necessary to update the signer list to ensure all signers are trusted, available, and aligned with the DAO’s ongoing objectives.
## Proposed Changes
### 
Remove the following signers:
\[Stratego Holdings] - \[0x623EeaAe05FB5A4Be01D45613928d4233da80Fd7]
\[Nathan Vandy] - \[0xE416dE13e7859Ba860de0DE3563dA1e4e97dbd97]
### Add the following signers:
\[Seb Davies] - \[0x97F8De405D7e70c0F66c2308d9882A9227097d6f]
\[Kevin Sparks] - \[0xB2F3cE5e63b0c303C475667f8CB28a47b14b9d9b]
## Rationale
The proposed additions are active contributors to the DAO and have demonstrated trustworthiness and availability. This change ensures a well-functioning multisig that meets operational needs, including timely transaction signing and governance execution.
## Implementation
Upon successful approval of this proposal, the Gnosis Safe multisig wallet will be updated to reflect the new list of signers. This update will be coordinated by the current Safe owners using the standard multisig change process.
## Next Governance Steps
Note: The tally vote will be a simple Mint Tx of 1 TRU to the Timelock as to memorialize the execution of the proposal on Tally.
# [TFIP-25] Bastion Trading as Additional MM for TRU Token
Truefi Additional Market Maker
Introduction
Truefi has been a long time standing token with who was the pioneer in the uncollateralized and undercollateralized lending crypto space with prestigious centralized exchange listings.
Bastion Trading
Bastion Trading has been trading cryptocurrencies since 2017 across various CEX and DEX platforms, as a proprietary trader and market maker. Bastion Trading is no stranger to Truefi being one of the first borrowers on the Truefi platform starting in 2021.
Currently Bastion Trading trades billions of dollars monthly across cryptocurrency tokens, coins, options, swaps and other derivatives on various centralised and decentralised exchanges. Bastion Trading also has provided market making services since 2018, and adjusting strategies across multiple market cycles.
Proposal
Bastion Trading aims to increase the liquidity profile of various CEX token and derivatives markets. The identified markets are to augment liquidity on Binance, while providing orderbook depth to Kraken spot markets, and Bybit swap markets. The goal is to increase order book health to encourage more volumes across trading venues for the TRU token. Given the state of the Truefi treasury in the timelock contract where a retainer model less feasible, Bastion Trading proposes the following TRU token loan with option market making contract (where Bastion Trading will provide the stablecoin side of the capital):
Token Loan Amount: 9,000,000 TRU
Tenure: 24 months from the market making start date.
Market Making Objectives:
On Touch Bid-Ask Spread: 30 bps
Minimum Depth Provided per 2% from mid-market: USDT 40,000 across all venues
Target Venues: Binance, Bybit Swap, and either of Kraken or Coinbase (with lean to Coinbase)
SLA (Uptime): 24/365 95%
Call options provided by Truefi: there are two call options and each gives Bastion Trading the option (not obligation) to purchase the loaned tokens 24 months from the market making start date at following amounts and strike prices:
Call Option 1: The option to purchase 50% of loaned tokens (4,500,000 TRU) at strike price 1, which has 17% premium to the spot price reference of when Bastion receives the tokens from Truefi.
Call Option 2: The option to purchase 50% of loaned tokens (4,500,000 TRU) at strike price 1, which has 32% premium to the spot price reference of when Bastion receives the tokens from Truefi.
Next Governance Steps
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
Amendment Period: If the 5% quorum is met, with a majority negative vote, a 72-hour period will follow to allow for any amendments or discussions before the proposal is posted to Tally.
Tally Vote: Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# TFIP-24: Proposal to Appoint Type3 as TrueFi Credit Risk Advisor
**Date: May 17, 2025**
**Abstract:**
Type3 formally proposes to the TrueFi DAO to be appointed as a dedicated Credit Risk Advisor (CRA). We aim to leverage our expertise in traditional finance and our upcoming Global Corporate Finance License from Mauritius to onboard high-quality, tokenized product offerings onto the TrueFi platform. Our strategy combines global sourcing efforts, a robust due diligence framework, and the strategic use of technology and outsourcing to ensure efficient and compliant operations. The value alignment of our offering is underscored by a proposed KPI-driven remuneration schedule, highly weighted towards attracting TVL to our upcoming vaults, achieved in partnership with Enclave Digital Wealth, an SEC-registered RIA. We believe this will significantly contribute to TrueFi’s growth in the Real-World Asset (RWA) sector and provide attractive, risk-mitigated opportunities for the TrueFi community.
**Motivation**:
TrueFi has established itself as a leading protocol in decentralized lending, with a growing emphasis on RWAs. Type3 recognizes the immense potential in bridging institutional-grade financial products with DeFi liquidity and composability. Our core value proposition is to source and onboard traditional fund clients seeking to tokenize their fund offerings. This initiative will bring a new class of institutional-grade assets to TrueFi, enhancing diversification and yield opportunities for lenders.
**Type3 Capital**
A team comprising crypto natives, traditional finance professionals and entrepreneurs, Type3 possesses leveraged loan, private credit, and structured finance origination, underwriting, and loan management experience from institutional and startup environments. Mandated by funds, corporates, and protocols, Type3 is KPI-driven and goes the extra mile to deliver.
**Enclave Digital Wealth**
Enclave Group is a private consortium built for founders, families, and digital asset investors who live outside the traditional system. Through Enclave Digital Wealth (RIA) and Private Circle (multi-family office), we deliver discreet, high-touch management of wealth, privacy, and global structures -integrating asset protection, entity control, and crypto-native strategies under one roof.
We are in the final stages of securing our Global Corporate Finance License from the Financial Services Commission (FSC) of Mauritius. Enclave Wealth Group, as an authorized SEC Investment Advisor, will be able to recommend TrueFi Vaults to its client base. These licenses underscore our commitment to operating within a recognized regulatory framework and adhering to international best practices for financial services. This regulatory standing will provide an additional layer of assurance to the TrueFi DAO and its lenders.
**Proposed Scope of Work as Credit Risk Advisor:**
As a TrueFi Credit Risk Advisor, Type3 will undertake the following key responsibilities:
**1. Sourcing and Onboarding Various Users for Truefi Vaults:**
1\. Borrowers / Lenders in Crypto Native and RWA space
2\. Tokenized Funds
3\. Other users
Our established relationships in the traditional and digital fund sector provide a strong pipeline of potential deals, ranging from tokenized Trade Invoice Funds and Permian basin oil fields.
**2. Rigorous Due Diligence:**
We will implement a comprehensive due diligence process covering:
* Fund Assessment: Financial health, track record, management team quality, governance, and operational capabilities of the team.
* Tokenization Viability: Legal and technical feasibility of tokenizing fund interests, including review of LPAs and asset suitability.
* Credit Risk Analysis: Credit scoring and risk profiling, augmented by AI tools for enhanced analysis.
**3. Deal Structuring and Legal Framework:**
We will structure credit facilities tailored to borrowers, including defining loan terms, covenants, and collateralization. We will work with legal experts specializing in DeFi and tokenization to prepare robust legal documentation.
**4. Ongoing Portfolio Monitoring and Reporting:**
We will provide continuous monitoring of active deals, manage client relationships, enforce covenants, and deliver transparent, regular reports to the TrueFi DAO on portfolio performance and risk metrics.
**5. Additional Value Proposition**
* Type3 will make use of the partnership work laid down by Cicada and TrueFi to onboard current contracted clients.
* TrueFi will benefit from Type3’s investment in global business development over the past year, which includes strategic partnerships, licenses, and infrastructure investments.
* Type3 clients include sovereigns, institutional investors, and major infrastructure projects. They have engaged Type3 to help advise and facilitate their asset tokenization strategies.
* Type3 was recently invited to attend a royal banquet in Abu Dhabi, subsequently advising on a tokenisation initiative for the country’s sovereign assets.
* Working with specialist fund managers, Type3 clients have fundraising requirements of in excess of $5bn, which range from pre-development solar project financing in Malawi, to producing oil wells in the Permian basin.
* We are especially excited by an upcoming tokenized US Trade Finance Fund product, with committed TVL, which we see as the natural progression up the risk curve from tokenized treasuries. Moreover, our client bases alignment to addressing UN Sustainability Development Goals opens the prospect of accessing large-scale donor grant programmes towards TrueFi vaults, alongside crypto native investor interest.
* As investors, we are well aware of the failures of previous RWA credit product lines and plan to mitigate these with judicious transactions and legal structuring, insurance, and institutional investment partners.
* Providing a dedicated origination and risk management function for TrueFi will enable us to focus on providing compelling risk-adjusted yield opportunities to the benefit of $TRU holders.
**Remuneration Model**:
Type3 proposes a remuneration model involving a combination of origination fees and performance-based fees. We propose the following ongoing fee structure:
We believe our specialized focus on tokenized funds, our regulatory standing, and our dedicated team make us a strong candidate for the role.
* $150,000 every 6 months,
* $30,000 initiation fee,
* $50,000 $TRU new vault opening fee:
* $25,000 bonus for TVL > $200k
* Additional $25,000 bonus for TVL > $500k, sustained for at least 3 months
* Additional $12,500 bonus for TVL > $750k, sustained for at least 3 months
* Additional $12,500 bonus for TVL > $1m, sustained for at least 3 months
* $50,000 bonus for sustained TVL > $500k sustained for at least 6 months
* $50,000 bonus for incremental $1m up to $10m TVL
Type3 is excited by the prospect of contributing to the TrueFi ecosystem. We believe our specialized focus on tokenized funds, our regulatory standing, and our dedicated team make us a strong candidate for the role. We request the TrueFi DAO community to review our proposal and welcome any questions or discussions.
We look forward to a favorable consideration and the opportunity to build a successful RWA lending vertical on TrueFi.
Thank you for your consideration.
**The Type3 Team**
# [TFIP-23] - TrueFi Operational Expense Request
### **Context & Previous Budget Approval**
In September 2024, the DAO approved under **TFIP-19** a **six-month budget of $1,175,000**, based on an estimated annual operational cost of **$2,100,000** under **TFIP-19**. This included:
* **$925,000 for operational expenses** (half-year funding based on projected costs).
* **$250,000** **for the Legal Reserve Fund** (allocated for a full year).
### **Current Status & Budget Performance**
* The previous **Legal Reserve Fund** currently still has **$125,000 remaining**
* We **operated below the allocated budget** for the initial six-month period, demonstrating our commitment to fiscal responsibility and strategic resource allocation. **($140,000)**
* A **detailed financial report for Q4 2024** is already included in the [**TrueFi DAO 2025 Report**.](https://www.notion.so/19eaba87760880bfa983d6a4b8605a8d?pvs=21)
* Another DAO report is being prepared for Q1+Q2 results.
### **Budget – Financial Overview**
1. This proposal requests **three months of operating expenses** to support core functions such as **governance, operational costs, and community initiatives**. The budget accounts for the necessary funding to maintain operational stability and strategic development, with an estimated total of **$497,000** for the upcoming 3 months.
2. The proposed budget will take a **~30% earmark in TRU’s token price at the execution of the proposal** before being swapped into stablecoins. This is to account for price fluctuations before the TRU-to-USDC/USDT conversion.
3. Any excess funds will be reported to the DAO at the end of the three months.
The purpose of this improvement proposal is to provide a use of funds to bridge the gap for the current operating team, and budget request for future improvements to the TrueFi ecosystem in three (3) main areas (I.e., product , business development, and protocol research). These improvements will be implemented across three (3) new workstreams:
1. TrueFi Front-end Product Overhaul – UI and UX improvements to the front end product beyond aesthetics, as these changes directly impact user adoption, retention, and overall protocol efficiency.
2. Research Analyst Hire (Part-Time) – A strategic force multiplier who enables marketing, business development, operations, and the community to work in sync via data dashboard creation and maintenance, product demos, content strategy execution, as an auxiliary generalist resource.
3. Legal Support Overview – TrueFi is working on the full entity formation and legal structuring of Polaris. The projected legal costs for this initiative are approximately $100,000 with $50,000 allocated specifically to Winston & Strawn’s assistance, working in coordination with CFDB.
4. Polaris - Continued Polaris development as we near targeted Q3 launch.
We are working with our agency partners (Flod) to deliver the designs and new branding which will be implemented on the TrueFi front end by Akemona. The current expiry for Akemona partnership is mid-Q2 2025 which aligns with when we plan to have all front end changes in production. We are highlighting the new branding and UI/UX via social media, coupled with long form research and blog posts.
A research analyst at this juncture will help with day to day support of long form content (Blog & RWA Protocol Research) as the broader team spins off to Polaris also assist with day to day TrueFi Foundation operations.
The team understands that Legal and Compliance make up a large portion of this request. With respect to legal and compliance fees, the team has been engaging best in class legal council as many legal decisions are not clear when engaging in innovation on the bleeding edge. We want to ensure we have the proper entity structure, governance, and documentation (E.g., Legal Opinions on the token) when setting up the Polaris entities as well as ongoing structuring of TrueFi. Otherwise, there might be unintended consequences on the backend we will end up paying for regardless. Winston & Strawn works closely with CFDB to support our initiatives. Both firms have been highly insightful and bring significant industry experience to the table. After a thorough review of dozens of firms, we engaged both based on their strong expertise.
To date, we have incurred approximately $30,000 in legal costs across Winston & Strawn, CFDB, and Mayer Brown.
* We currently maintain a $10,000 retainer with Winston & Strawn.
* We also have a $10,000 retainer with CFDB.
Mayer Brown was engaged in Q4 2024 to assist with TrueFi issuer work and regulatory compliance, totaling $10,500. Finally, TrueFi engaged Walkers in 2024 to provide legal advice during the DAO’s prior management transition and continued support through the change in leadership.
### Polaris’ Benefit to TrueFi Ecosystem
The market cap of Usual Money ($USUAL) peaked at $667 M and if, in a conservative case, we scale to 25% of their market cap, Polaris market cap will be 166.75 M. TrueFi will receive a 10% allocation, roughly $16.675 M mark-to-market value generated for TrueFi holders.
Increased TVL numbers will boost TrueFi visibility on platforms like [rwa.xyz](http://rwa.xyz/) and DefiLlama. Keep in mind, however, that this is solely from Polaris operations and the Foundation hopes to prioritize organic TVL growth in the near future, as well. TVL in the Credit Pools earns a higher fee for the TrueFi DAO.
We imagined a bear case where Polaris scaled to ~24% of Usual’s success in 6 months (Usual saw a high of $1.85 B). In the following scenario, at the 444M Polaris bear-case TVL, roughly 80% will go into the tfBill product, generating $25,500 in revenue for the DAO.
## **Estimated Budget in USD:**
| Position/Item | Annual | Quarter | TrueFi | Polaris\* |
| -------------------------- | -------- | ------------ | ------------ | ------------ |
| Operations Head (x1) | $150,000 | $37,500 | $0 | $37,500 |
| Product Manager (x1) | $150,000 | $37,500 | $0 | $37,500 |
| Business Development (x1) | $150,000 | $37,500 | $0 | $37,500 |
| Full Stack Engineers (x2) | $400,000 | $100,000 | $0 | $100,000 |
| Marketer (x1) | $100,000 | $25,000 | $25,000 | $0 |
| Directors Fees | $120,000 | $30,000 | $30,000 | $0 |
| Research Analyst (x1) | $36,000 | $9,000 | $9,000 | $0 |
| Community Moderator (x1) | $3,000 | $750 | $750 | $0 |
| Designer (UI/UX) | $108,000 | $27,000 | $27,000 | $0 |
| Operational Infrastructure | $10,000 | $2,500 | $0 | $2,500 |
| Team Travel | $36,000 | $9,000 | $0 | $9,000 |
| Marketing/PR | $35,000 | $8,750 | $8,750 | $0 |
| Events | $40,000 | $10,000 | $0 | $10,000 |
| Legal and Compliance | $500,000 | $125,000 | $25,000 | $100,000 |
| Financial Admin and Audit | $150,000 | $37,000 | $37,000 | $0 |
| **Total Expenses** | | **$497,000** | **$163,000** | **$334,000** |
### \*Note on Polaris Costs
There would be a loan structure where TrueFi recoups the full development cost of Polaris, as well as 10% of token supply on top of this. We feel this is in line with the risk being taken by the DAO and should not only provide liquid capital in terms of loan repayment to TrueFi but also generate significant upside for token holders and the DAO.
### **Breakdown by Cost Center is as Follows:**
| Cost Center | Q2 2025 |
| ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------ |
| Finance | $37,500 |
| Legal and Compliance | $125,000 |
| Managing Operational and Business Development Costs | $281,000 |
| Marketing and Community Management, Community Team Onboarding, and Social (IRL) Outreach | $44,500 |
| Team Travel for Regional Representation | $9,000 |
| Legal Reserve Fund | N/A |
| Investment Vehicle Creation | N/A |
| Projected Operational Cost | **$497,000** |
This budget ensures continuity of operations while maintaining cost discipline and alignment with previously approved financial plans.
We are working with our agency partners (Flod) to deliver the designs and new branding which will be implemented on the TrueFi front end by Akemona. The current expiry for Akemona partnership is mid-Q2 2025 which aligns with when we plan to have all front end changes in production. We are highlighting the new branding and UI/UX via social media, coupled with long form research.
We also expect a reduction in operational overhead as Polaris development separates into its own entity. For the development funded pre-seperation, there is a loan agreement with Polaris to repay the DAO for the cost of incubation. The majority of the team is not in the United States, and we will be prioritizing lower cost-of-living geographies as we grow into a steady state.
| **Projected Operational Cost** | **$497,000** |
| ------------------------------ | ------------------- |
| Reallocation from the TFIP-19 | -$140,000 |
| Budget Funding Request | $357,000 |
| ~30% Earmark | $107,100 |
| Total Funding request | **$464,100** |
| **TRU price** | **$0,02708** |
| **TRU minting request** | **~17,138,200 TRU** |
## TrueFi & Polaris Budget Proposal KPIs
### TrueFi Product/Engineering
* Continue to expand TrueFi offerings on new ecosystems and DeFi integrations
* KPI: 3 bluechip DeFi integrations for tfBills and vault aggregator integrations for Lending Pools
* Timeline: Q2
* TrueFI Core Product Overhaul
* UI/UX Overhaul
* KPI: UI/UX modifications deployed to production
* Timeline: Mid Q2
* Tighter Adapter tfBill integration
* KPI: As part of UI/UX integrations mint and redeem for tfBills prominently displayed on the homepage
* Timeline: Mid Q2
* Grow community Engagement and marketing impact through data-driven strategies
* KPI: 1 long form monthly blogpost and increase engagement on X by 25% (Likes, Comments, and Reposts)
* Timeline: End of Q2
### Polaris
* Successful spin-out and launch of Polaris
* Polaris fundraise and spinout
* KPI: Successful VC Fundraise of goal amount and Entity Seperation
* Timeline: Early Q2
* Polaris Security Audits
* KPI: Multiple Successful Security Audits of Polaris Codebase
* Timeline: Mid/Late Q2
## **Goals Enabled by TFIP-23**
1. TVL Growth: There will be incentives on TrueFi TVL through ecosystem partner incentives. For example, a potential tfBill points program/Polaris points program. Increased TVL of both tfBill and Polaris will directly flow through TrueFi infrastructure.
2. TRU Token: Polaris TVL will be routed through TrueFi infrastructure, generating fee revenue and increasing TVL for the TrueFi protocol. In addition, there will be a Polaris Token distribution for the TrueFi Ecosystem. More information will be shared on this in the coming months.
3. Polaris & TrueFi: Polaris is aiming to be a regulatory compliant yield-bearing stablecoin. In maintaining airtight compliance, operations on the stablecoin and other aspects of TrueFi’s business will not be co-mingled. Again, Polaris is being built within the TrueFi ecosystem, and Polaris TVL will flow through TrueFi’s permissionless infrastructure, increasing TVL for TrueFi.
4. DeFi Integrations: As we finalize partnerships, we will make public announcements on them. We can reveal that we are in the process of working with Morpho on an official tfBill/TrueFi partnership. Again, more to come on this soon.
5. UI/UX Updates: Currently, the user flow for interacting with TrueFi’s Lending Pools and tfBills is highly disjointed. The team, in conjunction with FLOD, is working on a complete front-end product overhaul that will reduce friction for depositing TVL into TrueFi. We will share sneak peaks with the community in the coming weeks.
6. Finance team: Between Q4 2024 and Q1 2025, the financial team delivered on core reporting, treasury, and compliance objectives—submitting the 2023 AFR, implementing crypto-to-fiat payment rails, and supporting the Plume integration. TrueFi now operates with full financial autonomy, no longer reliant on Archblock for payments. Looking ahead to Q2–Q3 2025, we aim to continue internal reporting, forecasting, and budget execution while preparing the 2024 AFR under BVI compliance. Ongoing budget support remains critical to maintain continuity and uphold strong, decentralized financial governance.
## **Next Governance Steps**
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
**Tally Vote:** The proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-23] - TrueFi Operational Expense Request
### **Context & Previous Budget Approval**
In September 2024, the DAO approved under **TFIP-19** a **six-month budget of $1,175,000**, based on an estimated annual operational cost of **$2,100,000** under **TFIP-19**. This included:
* **$925,000 for operational expenses** (half-year funding based on projected costs).
* **$250,000 for the Legal Reserve Fund** (allocated for a full year).
### **Current Status & Budget Performance**
* The **Legal Reserve Fund currently remains unutilized**. (**$250,000)**
* We **operated below the allocated budget** for the initial six-month period, demonstrating our commitment to fiscal responsibility and strategic resource allocation. **($140,000)**
* A **detailed financial report for Q4 2024** is already included in the **TrueFi DAO 2025 Report**.
* We will provide another budget report at the **end of Q1 2025** for transparency on the upcoming period.
### **Budget – Financial Overview**
1. This proposal requests **six months of operating expenses** to support core functions such as **governance, operational costs, and community initiatives**. The budget accounts for the necessary funding to maintain operational stability and strategic development, with an estimated total of **$994,000** for the upcoming period.
2. The proposed budget will take a **~30% earmark in TRU’s token price at the execution of the proposal** before being swapped into stablecoins. This is to account for price fluctuations before the TRU-to-USDC/USDT conversion.
3. Any excess funds will be reported to the DAO at the end of the six months.
The purpose of this improvement proposal is to provide a use of funds to bridge the gap for the current operating team, and budget request for future improvements to the TrueFi ecosystem in three (3) main areas (I.e., product , business development, and protocol research). These improvements will be implemented across two new (2) workstreams:
1. TrueFi Front-end Product Overhaul – UI and UX improvements to the front end product beyond aesthetics, as these changes directly impact user adoption, retention, and overall protocol efficiency.
2. Research Analyst Hire (Part-Time) – A strategic force multiplier who enables marketing, business development, operations, and the community to work in sync via data dashboard creation and maintenance, product demos, content strategy execution, as an auxiliary generalist resource.
We are working with our agency partners (Flod) to deliver the designs and new branding which will be implemented on the TrueFi front end by Akemona. The current expiry for Akemona partnership is mid-Q2 2025 which aligns with when we plan to have all front end changes in production. We are highlighting the new branding and UI/UX via social media, coupled with long form research.
### **Estimated Budget in USD:**
| **Position/Item** | **Annual** | **Half year** |
| -------------------------- | ---------- | ------------- |
| Operations Head (x1) | $150,000 | $75,000 |
| Product Manager (x1) | $150,000 | $75,000 |
| Business Development (x1) | $150,000 | $75,000 |
| Full Stack Engineers (x2) | $400,000 | $200,000 |
| Marketer (x1) | $100,000 | $50,000 |
| Directors Fees | $120,000 | $60,000 |
| Research Analyst (x1) | $36,000 | $18,000 |
| Community Moderator (x1) | $3,000 | $1,500 |
| Designer (UI/UX) | $108,000 | $54,000 |
| Operational Infrastructure | $10,000 | $5,000 |
| Team Travel | $36,000 | $18,000 |
| Marketing/PR | $35,000 | $17,500 |
| Events | $40,000 | $20,000 |
| Legal and Compliance | $500,000 | $250,000 |
| Financial Admin and Audit | $150,000 | $75,000 |
| Total Expenses | | $994,000 |
### Breakdown by Cost Center is as follows:
| **Cost Center** | **Q2 2025** | **Q3 2025** | **Total** |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------ | ------------ | ------------ |
| Finance | $37,500 | $37,500 | $75,000 |
| Legal and Compliance | $125,000 | $125,000 | $250,000 |
| Managing Operational and Business Development Costs | $281,000 | $281,000 | $562,000 |
| Marketing and Community Management,Community Team Onboarding, and Social (IRL) Outreach | $44,500 | $44,500 | $89,000 |
| Team Travel for Regional Representation | $9,000 | $9,000 | $18,000 |
| Legal Reserve Fund | N/A | N/A | $0 |
| Investment Vehicle Creation | N/A | N/A | $0 |
| **Projected Operational Cost** | **$497,000** | **$497,000** | **$994,000** |
This budget ensures continuity of operations while maintaining cost discipline and alignment with previously approved financial plans.
We are working with our agency partners (Flod) to deliver the designs and new branding which will be implemented on the TrueFi front end by Akemona. The current expiry for Akemona partnership is mid-Q2 2025 which aligns with when we plan to have all front end changes in production. We are highlighting the new branding and UI/UX via social media, coupled with long form research.
| **Projected Operational Cost** | **$994,000** |
| --------------------------------- | --------------- |
| **Reallocation from the TFIP-19** | **-$140,000** |
| **Budget Funding request** | **$854,000** |
| **~30% earmark** | $**256,200** |
| **Total Funding request** | **$1,110,200** |
| | |
| TRU price | $0,03761 |
| TRU minting request | ~29,519,000 TRU |
### **Community Forum Discussion Highlights**
[Updated Roadmap with Polaris and TrueFi Milestones](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-23-truefi-operational-expense-request-discourse/2633/3#p-5634-truefi-productengineering-1)
[Growth & TVL, UI/UX Overhaul Discourse, and DeFi Integrations](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-23-truefi-operational-expense-request-discourse/2633/9?u=kelvinsparks)
[Scaling TVL, Revenue and Fees with Polaris](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-23-truefi-operational-expense-request-discourse/2633/12?u=kelvinsparks)
[TrueFi's Incubation of Polaris (1/2)](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-23-truefi-operational-expense-request-discourse/2633/15?u=kelvinsparks)
[TrueFi's Incubation of Polaris (2/2)](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-23-truefi-operational-expense-request-discourse/2633/16?u=kelvinsparks)
### **Next Governance Steps**
As the proposals does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
**1. Snapshot Vote:** A 48-hour Snapshot vote will be conducted with the options: “OK to vote on Tally,” “Not OK to vote on Tally,” and “Abstain.” At least 5% of staked TRU must participate in this Snapshot vote to meet the quorum.
**2. Amendment Period:** If the 5% quorum is met, with a majority negative vote, a 72-hour period will follow to allow for any amendments or discussions before the proposal is posted to Tally.
**3. Tally Vote:** Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP-21] Permission to re-execute the recently approved Tally proposal
We seek the community's permission to re-execute [the recently approved Tally proposal](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/truefi/proposal/55677865797366281588985532248798390833362633042650910480595867106296551010142).
Because of our desire to synchronize Sablier payments with the 7-month term of the [TFIP-21 proposal](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-21-proposal-for-akemona-technologies-to-provide-core-product-and-business-development-for-truefi/1892), we set up a Sablier start time that was very close to the end of the timelock contract. As a result, we had a very short window of time to execute the code in the approved proposal and missed that window of time. Now, the code in the [Tally proposal](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/truefi/proposal/55677865797366281588985532248798390833362633042650910480595867106296551010142) cannot be executed, since the Sablier start time is in the past.
Therefore, we are requesting permission to re-execute the code with the same parameters but a revised Sablier start time.
Please refer to the [previously approved Tally proposal](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/truefi/proposal/55677865797366281588985532248798390833362633042650910480595867106296551010142).
Thank you very much for your understanding and support.
# [TFIP-21] Reposting the proposal for payment to Akemona
We are reposting the proposal to execute the previously approved [TFIP-21](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/truefi/proposal/59304444877355933583900602495342632896134093351792923313709722409716343808237) for Payment to Akemona since [the proposal posted earlier](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/truefi/proposal/56216990416813453203399474757385590365808454952217836014985144669582229011686) did not reach the quorum. This proposal is based on a start date of November 1, 2024 and end date of May 31, 2025.
The changes are as follows:
1. Akemona is paid through TRU
2. USD payments converted to TRU based on TRU price of $0.07002 on October 26, 2024.
3. 18% added to account for the variance in the price of TRU
**Payment Schedule**
Akemona is requesting a grant of 7,549,843 TRU to fund the implementation of the roadmap laid out in the TFIP-21 forum proposal over the next seven months. Of this total, we are requesting 1,078,549 TRU up front, with the remaining portion streamed over 7 months starting at the end of November, 2024.
Functions included in this proposal:
1. Mint TRU to DAO Timelock
2. Transfer TRU to Akemona Wallet
3. Approve TRU for Sablier Stream Creation
4. Create TRU Sablier Stream for Akemona
Please refer to the [TFIP-21 discussion](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-21-proposal-for-akemona-technologies-to-provide-core-product-and-business-development-for-truefi/1892) on the TrueFi forum.
# [TFIP-21] Proposal to execute previously approved TFIP-21 for payment to Akemona
Proposal to execute previously approved [TFIP-21](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/truefi/proposal/59304444877355933583900602495342632896134093351792923313709722409716343808237) for Payment to Akemona. Please refer to Nathan Vandy's comment under [TFIP-21 discussion](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-21-proposal-for-akemona-technologies-to-provide-core-product-and-business-development-for-truefi/1892) on the TrueFi forum. The original [TFIP-21](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/truefi/proposal/59304444877355933583900602495342632896134093351792923313709722409716343808237) proposal on Tally will be left pending as it does not have an executable code.
To simplify payments, the changes are as follows:
1. Akemona is paid through TRU
2. USD payments converted to TRU based on TRU price of $0.08259 on October 15, 2024.
3. 18% added to account for the variance in the price of TRU
**Payment Schedule**
Akemona is requesting a total grant of 6,400,775 TRU to fund the implementation of the roadmap laid out in the TFIP-21 forum proposal over the next seven months. Of this total, we are requesting 914,396 TRU up front, with the remaining portion streamed over 7 months starting at the end of October, 2024.
Functions included in this proposal:
1.  Mint TRU to DAO Timelock
2. Transfer TRU to Akemona Wallet
3. Approve TRU for Sablier Stream Creation
4. Create TRU Sablier Stream for Akemona
Please refer to the [TFIP-21 discussion](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-21-proposal-for-akemona-technologies-to-provide-core-product-and-business-development-for-truefi/1892) on the TrueFi forum.
# [TFIP-21] Proposal for Akemona to Provide Core Product and Business Development
## Akemona Technologies is pleased to present this proposal to provide core product and business development for TrueFi
References: [TrueFi Forum Post](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-21-proposal-for-akemona-technologies-to-provide-core-product-and-business-development-for-truefi/1892 "TrueFi Forum Post"), [Snapshot Vote](https://snapshot.org/#/truefi-dao.eth/proposal/0xf4084ba6a8c04d9ace24790505db07daed01c2911cdbe0bd1e98290ef7703572 "Snapshot Vote")
**1. Preamble**
Author: Ravi Srivastava, the founder and CEO of Akemona
Status: Formal Submission
Contributors: Akemona team includes members with prior experience developing the Protocol
**2. Summary**
As the RWA market continues to expand and become more competitive, TrueFi has an opportunity to leverage its existing market-leading Protocol & technology stack with its new governance structure to revitalize its product offerings to attract new lenders, borrowers, and issuers to the Protocol. This proposal is a plan for the TrueFi Foundation and Community to bring on [Akemona Technologies](https://akemona.com/)’ team as TrueFi’s new core product and business development team. We would take the lead on the following roles Mr. Vandy enumerated in [TFIP-19](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-19-truefi-forward-vision-and-operational-expense-request/1861):
“5. Day-to-day website user interface (“UI”) and user experience (“UX”) tech managers
6\. Smart contract maintenance
7\. New product development from a technology standpoint
8\. New product or counterparts liaison specialist”
Our proposed 7-month budget, through the end of Q1 2025, is USD 448,000 (see the itemization at the end of this document), paid out monthly in the form of USD 54,000 in USDC and USD 10,000 in TRU tokens.
**Our offer includes services for items #5 to #8 from TFIP-19 stated above, which will be covered by Ravi Srivastava and Brady Matthews. Akemona can bring in additional staff if needed. As described below Akemona has included the enhancement of the TrueFi platform and protocol with the Akemona platform in this proposal.**
**Further items #5 to #8 from TFIP-19 are high-level descriptions. The Akemona team will make an assessment and add more details to the description of these activities to measure the level of effort required and derive suitable KPIs.**
There will be quarterly reviews with the Board and Community via the TrueFi Forum to evaluate KPI performance under our engagement. If we’ve satisfactorily met or exceeded our KPIs, then our relationship should automatically extend for an additional 6 months with new KPIs mutually agreed to by Akemona, the Board, and the Community. In this constantly evolving market, long-term engagements are not nimble enough to adapt to new market developments and the needs of the Protocol.
**3. Motivation**
**Why Akemona?** Akemona is building the future of finance as a pioneer in digital securities and RWA tokenization. Founded in 2018, we’ve developed and launched the first regulated funding portal protocol managed by smart contracts in the United States. Akemona [registered with the SEC](https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany\&filenum=7-173) in 2018 and received [FINRA membership](https://www.finra.org/about/firms-we-regulate/funding-portals-we-regulate) approval in 2020 under SEC Regulation Crowdfunding (Reg CF). This year Akemona successfully closed three small, tokenized offerings ([Wolfer](https://polygonscan.com/address/0x9866be60dd080568ef2eda3e2293d8a33fb9070c), [PreSend](https://polygonscan.com/address/0x7e593bb183a7a3a65afd94b300fafee89091648b), [Soma](https://etherscan.io/address/0xbdb9a713553dcf010db8abc99e96c1d4f76499aa)) under Reg CF. Subsequently, Akemona enhanced the platform to add tokenization of RWA under SEC Regulations A, D/S, and Investment Companies 1940 Act. Through the expansion of its tokenization protocol (see Akemona wallet addresses at [Etherscan](https://etherscan.io/address/0x8FCF88F1cEb0443DE1d2ACbe1f4a976103A9e63d) and [Polygonscan](https://etherscan.io/address/0x8FCF88F1cEb0443DE1d2ACbe1f4a976103A9e63d)) which includes [SEC-registered](https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=1846771) onchain transfer agent services ([OnchainTA](https://onchainta.com/)), issuance of perks as utility tokens and NFTs, partnership with [ARCA Labs](https://www.arcalabs.com/), and collaboration with the [CAF Bank of Latin America](https://www.caf.com/) for tokenized thematic bonds, Akemona is expanding in the United States capital market. In 2024 Akemona launched a new white-labeled tokenized fundraising platform, which is doing well in the real estate development industry in the United States.
Legacy capital market infrastructure (comprising depositories, exchanges, clearing agencies, and multiple intermediaries) is slow and inefficient, which results in long settlement times with the majority of settlements taking up to 2 days. In addition, most of this infrastructure exists only for publicly traded securities. Private securities issued under SEC exemptions do not have such infrastructure (except newly emerging ATS and transfer agents in the last 5 years). Under the SEC’s exempt offering framework, which includes Regulations CF, D/S, and A, about USD 1.5 trillion is raised each year (Ref: [Capital Raising in the U.S.: An Analysis of Unregistered Offerings Using the Regulation D Exemption, 2009‐2012](https://www.sec.gov/divisions/riskfin/whitepapers/dera-unregistered-offerings-reg-d.pdf), and [Report to Congress on Regulation A / Regulation D Performance, August 2020](https://www.sec.gov/files/report-congress-regulation.pdf)) in the United States. The private capital market is not only larger than the public capital market, but also it is growing at a faster pace. Recognizing this opportunity, Akemona has focused its technology on the tokenization of RWAs under the exempt offering framework of the SEC. Akemona’s tokenization protocol eliminates post-trade processing, speeds up settlement, and reduces the cost of raising capital.
Tokenized digital securities can be traded 24x7 and are settled immediately, providing full transparency of trade and pricing. In addition, issuers can issue dividends in the form of NFTs and utility tokens, which investors can redeem through the OnchainTA protocol, which became operational in 2024. The Akemona protocol enables borrowers and issuers to accept investments in any ERC-20 token of their choice (for example, TRU, TUSD, USDC, etc.). The tokenized securities issued by borrowers/issuers through the Akemona protocol have a minimum holding period depending on the regulations under which they are issued. After the holding period, investors may trade tokenized securities peer-to-peer through the whitelist of investors in compliance with the securities acts.
TrueFi is DeFi-centric and while the expertise of Akemona is on the TradFi side, lessons learned will easily carry over to DeFi and enhance the experience. Akemona’s expertise in TradFi complements TrueFi’s focus on DeFi. By leveraging Akemona’s institutional knowledge and proven smart-contract development, the experience from the TradFi world will enhance TrueFi’s DeFi and make the system safer while preserving its open and innovative nature. This collaboration with Akemona enables TrueFi to bridge the gap between traditional and decentralized finance without compromising the core principles of DeFi.
**The Team**
* [Ravi Srivastava, CEO](https://www.linkedin.com/in/ravi-sriv/): Ravi conceptualized the Akemona platform as a regulated securities tokenization platform using smart contracts and blockchain technology. Ravi has extensive experience in corporate finance, technology, and the regulatory environment of financial markets. Before founding Akemona, Ravi was with Insurance (Travelers), Private Equity (Trident, Zenith), Healthcare (Kaiser Permanente), Technology (Dell), and Banking (Bank of America, Reserve Bank of India). Ravi Srivastava is based in Orange County, California.
* [Brady Matthews, CTO](https://www.linkedin.com/in/brady-matthews-316529a/): Brady Matthews, a co-founder, developed all the smart contracts for the Akemona and OnchainTA protocols. In addition, he defined the technology architecture of Akemona. He is recognized as the leading expert in blockchain technology in the United States. Brady has over 12 years of experience building complex enterprise applications on a broad range of software frameworks, platforms, and devices. Following agile methods, Brady has led large teams with on-shore and off-shore staffing to deliver high-quality web and mobile applications, scaled for millions of users (Accenture). Brady lives in Dallas, Texas.
* [Marina Mataraga, Partner](https://www.linkedin.com/in/marina-mataraga-04818a3/): Marina Mataraga, a co-founder, brings inspiration and deep thoughtfulness to our operations. She developed the original requirements of the Akemona smart contracts. Marina has contributed to Akemona on a part-time basis as needed. She is an industry-recognized leader in horizontal integration and problem-solving. Marina has experience in Healthcare, Finance/Banking, Manufacturing, and Retail. Marina has led a globalized product organization of 300+ people with sales and support to multiple customers with accountability to evolving federal regulations (Dell). Marina is based in Texas.
* Akash Patel, Lead Software Engineer: Akash has been working with Akemona 24x7 since the beginning. He is a highly trusted partner who brings a strong work ethic to software development. Akash stays ahead of the technology curve and makes sure that we have minimal to no technology debt. Akash has a deep understanding of the technology behind Akemona and OnchainTA and what makes it work. Whenever we are making enhancements and changes to the system, Akash provides valuable insights that make our processes better and faster. Akash is based in Gujarat, India.
* Divangi Barvaliya, Software Engineer: Divangi has contributed to Akemona full-time since the beginning. She distinguishes herself as a very methodical, process-oriented, and focused software engineer. Divangi deeply understands our systems, processes, code base, and business rules. She has implemented most of the business rules in the investor and borrower/issuer portals’ code base. Divangi lives near Toronto in Canada.
* Engineering Contractors: Akemona has contracted with engineers responsible for the early development of the Protocol. This experience will provide Akemona with the ability to quickly onramp into TrueFi’s tech stack and begin executing the product roadmap efficiently.
**Why TrueFi?** TrueFi has a successful record of making credit more accessible, transparent, and programmable by bringing debt infrastructure onchain. TrueFi has strong brand recognition across the crypto community. Akemona has developed a regulatory-compliant platform for the issuance of tokenized bonds, which TrueFi can leverage through its marketing outreach in the community. Using the Akemona platform, TrueFi is well-positioned to develop new lines of credit (LOC) products, which leverage the efficiency of blockchain technology and lower the cost of capital. Akemona and TrueFi partnership has the potential to position TrueFi to enter the institutional capital market in the United States and across the world.
**4. TrueFi & Akemona Q4 2024 and Q1 2025**
* Protocol enhancement I (Phase 1): The first phase of Akemona’s involvement with TrueFi will be to align with the Board and Community on a refreshed TrueFi product roadmap. The Wallfacer team [proposed a very well-thought-out roadmap on June 6, 2024](https://forum.truefi.io/t/truefi-wallfacer-labs-chapter-3/1708). We propose starting fresh with a Town Hall on October 1, 2024, where the Board, Community, and Akemona team can have an open discussion to whiteboard out proposed protocol improvements. We can begin the conversation with Wallfacer’s proposed improvements and then field additional proposals from the Community, before working with the Board to align on a draft TrueFi Product Roadmap through Q1 2025 for the Community’s consideration.
* Protocol enhancement II (Phase 2): Enhance the TrueFi website and protocol by integrating the Akemona software to create a TrueFi capability for borrowers/issuers to launch their own debt/equity security tokens for raising onchain funds under SEC Regulation D 506(c)\* for lenders to make investments under the same regulations. Borrowers will be able to (1) create an offering, (2) accept investments using TRU, (3) if needed, collateralize the assets purchased from the funds raised, (4) pay back the principal and interest/dividends using TRU, (5) reward investors using utility tokens, which investors may exchange for TRU. Lenders will be able to loan funds to the borrowers using TRU. To achieve these goals, Akemona will integrate its white-label tokenization platform with the TrueFi website, so that it works seamlessly with the website. The Akemona tokenization platform manages the entire lifecycle of tokenized assets from issuance to redemption in compliance with SEC regulations. The addition of this capability will enable TrueFi to enter the largest capital market in the world and provide services to borrowers/issuers for a fee.
Akemona will provide “Test-the-Waters” capability to potential borrowers/issuers under SEC Reg CF on the TrueFi website. Under the current SEC regulations, an issuer intending to raise funds under Reg CF may use any platform to reach out to potential investors to record their intent to invest in the issuer’s future tokenized offering. Upon successful completion of the “Test-the-Waters” campaign, an issuer will have a reasonable forecast of how much they expect to raise from their onchain tokenized offering. To achieve success “Test-the-Waters” campaigns require significant outreach and marketing to potential investors. Akemona will bring its experience to guide the regulatory-compliant marketing of tokenized offerings. Potential borrowers/issuers do not have to decide the regulation under which they intend to raise funds before completing a “Test-the-Waters” campaign. Therefore, a “Test-the-Waters” could be a generic campaign.
Upon successful completion of a “Test-the-Waters” campaign, if a borrower/issuer wants to raise funds under Reg D/S by selling tokens to investors, they can do that on the TrueFi website. If the borrower/issuer decides to raise funds under Reg CF, Akemona will make its tokenization platform available to the borrower/issuer at cost, since fundraising under Reg CF requires the offering to be conducted on an SEC-registered funding portal.
Borrowers may use regulations D and CF for issuing long-term debt or lines of credit. Due diligence and underwriting for the issuance of debt could be performed by a debt underwriting company, like, Cicada Partners. For Reg CF, the funding portal is required to perform a reasonable review. However, Cicada Partners could provide additional due diligence on top of the reasonable review for the assessment of risk, which would act as a credit enhancement.
Expanding the TrueFi protocol to Reg CF may present intriguing opportunities. Reg CF tokens are the only tokenized securities that can be traded peer-to-peer among non-accredited investors after the holding period of one year. In addition, non-accredited/small investors from all over the world (excluding countries barred under the OFAC) may invest in Reg CF tokens issued under the laws of the United States. Private companies with scale, e.g., Substack, have been very successful with Reg CF. Real estate investments in the United States through Reg CF for non-accredited/small international investors could potentially offer protection of principal and growth. Similarly, a Reg CF offering could be used to create a whiskey fund, which could offer an excellent risk/return trade-off. Issuers are allowed to raise up to $5 million in 12 months under Reg CF by issuing debt, equity, membership interest, future revenue, and future equity.
TrueFi could charge a fixed fee of USD 5,000 to USD 25,000 from borrowers/issuers who use its services to issue and sell tokenized securities. The fee will depend on the platform services provided to a borrower/issuer. Under the regulations, TrueFi cannot charge a success-based fee or commission (for example 2% of the amount raised on the platform) from potential borrowers/issuers. Similarly, test-the-waters services could be priced at USD 1,000 to USD 1,500 depending on the support needed by a potential borrower/issuer. Potential borrowers/issuers may pay these fees in TRU.
[<img height="261" width="624" src="https://global.discourse-cdn.com/business6/uploads/truefi/optimized/1X/ddd5eb5b30a22fb749c1471adb8f8e06dcc9934d_2_624x261.png" />](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/business6/uploads/truefi/original/1X/ddd5eb5b30a22fb749c1471adb8f8e06dcc9934d.png)
\*Akemona will provide its full suite of software, which includes Regulations D 506(c), 506(b), S, A, CF, and the Investment Companies 1940 Act. Initially, Reg D 506(c) may be most suitable. If necessary and legally feasible, Akemona will provide options to enable the issuance of unregulated or lightly regulated tokens in jurisdictions that allow such issuance.
* Protocol enhancement III (Phase 3): The other area, which may be of interest is the Investment Companies 1940 Act. We would propose to launch a tokenized mutual fund under the Investment Companies Act of 1940 to create a fund that invests in tokens launched under Protocol Enhancement I. Such a fund could allow accredited as well as non-accredited investors to invest in the expanded TrueFi protocol. The sale and distribution of these tokens will be onchain through the protocol. This fund will require registration with the SEC, which is time-consuming. However, it may be possible to partner with some companies that already have funds registered with the SEC to speed up the launch.
**5. Akemona’s Mandate**
Why use an external technology service provider? By providing a white-label platform Akemona’s regulated offering can help the TrueFi community enter the largest capital market in the United States with its RWA products within 4.5 months.
Audits of Akemona
* Highland Security audited Akemona smart contracts and the code base in September of 2023. No red flags were found. 24 risks were identified in the yellow (low to medium risk) category related to cloud services, network security, and smart contracts. We fixed 20 of those low to medium-risk issues. The remaining items are low priority, and not related to smart contracts.
* On October 20, 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) initiated an examination of OnchainTA. On December 7, 2022, the SEC identified four deficiencies. We resolved all those deficiencies by June 8, 2023, to the satisfaction of the SEC.
* On December 22, 2021, the SEC initiated an audit of Akemona. They closed the audit on December 30, 2021, with no comments.
* On August 17, 2021, FINRA initiated an examination of Akemona. They closed the examination on January 28, 2022, with minor comments.
Akemona’s Mandate. Launch the project at the beginning of October 2024 to deliver a seamlessly integrated SEC-compliant tokenization platform for the issuance of tokens to the TrueFi community by February 15, 2025.
**6. Proposed Roadmap / Statement of Work through Q1 2025**
[<img height="500" width="353" src="https://global.discourse-cdn.com/business6/uploads/truefi/optimized/1X/c3ec6bf15f73358e1a77d97635f545cd91b77c23_2_353x500.png" />](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/business6/uploads/truefi/original/1X/c3ec6bf15f73358e1a77d97635f545cd91b77c23.png)
**Phase 1**
* **Product**
* Align on a refreshed TrueFi Product Roadmap through Q1 2025. Based on [Wallfacer’s most recent roadmap](https://forum.truefi.io/t/truefi-wallfacer-labs-chapter-3/1708), these were the proposed initiatives:
* Index Vaults & ALOCs
* Multichain Expansion
* ALOC Dynamic interest curves
* UI/UX Improvements
* Website Improvements
* Community & Governance Improvements
* **Execution**
* KPI: Refresh and finalize TrueFi’s product roadmap on or before October 31, 2024.
* KPI: Set and publish monthly KPIs based on the final product roadmap on or before October 31, 2024.
* **Phase 2**
* **Product**
* Investor Portal (buy tokens and indicate interest in test-the-waters)
* Borrower Portal (launch offerings and test-the-waters campaigns)
* Admin Portal (manage offerings and test-the-waters campaigns)
* Transfer Agent Portal (This will require TrueFi to form an entity for registration with the SEC. Until then, OnchainTA can provide such services at cost between USD 1,500 and USD 3,000 per year per offering for supporting tokenized securities.)
* During the planning exercise, Akemona will obtain feedback for customizations from the community and develop a plan to implement that feedback.
* **Execution**
* KPI: Investor Portal integrated into a subdomain of TrueFi (e.g., [invest.truefi.io](http://invest.truefi.io/)) for investment in offerings using TrueFi ERC-20 tokens.
* KPI: Borrower Portal integrated into a subdomain of TrueFi (e.g., [issue.truefi.io](http://issue.truefi.io/)) to create tokenized offerings in the Investor Portal for investments
* KPI: Admin Portal integrated into a subdomain of TrueFi (e.g., [admin.truefi.io](http://admin.truefi.io/)) to manage offerings.
* **Phase 3** (TBD in conjunction with the Community)
**7. Funding**
**Itemized Budget**
1. **Investor, Borrower/Issuer, and Admin Portals Service Fee**: USD 25,000 per month (includes full support, ongoing maintenance, enhancements, and customization for TrueFi)
2. **Brady Matthews**: USD 150 per hour, estimated: USD 24,000 per month - smart contract maintenance plus UI/UX of the TrueFi website and other online assets.
3. **Ravi Srivastava**: 30 hours per week: USD 15,000 per month (includes support for new product and technology leadership and development, technology infrastructure, foundational work, regulatory analysis/compliance, community coordination, joint business development, etc.)
4. **Total**: USD 64,000 per month (USD 448,000 for 7 months)
**Terms**
1. USD 64,000 is payable at the start of the project.
2. The remainder is payable monthly on the 1st of each month upon the presentation of an invoice by Akemona.
**Ongoing Budget After the Initial Implementation**
**Investor, Borrower/Issuer, and Admin Portals Service Fee**: USD 15,000 per month (includes full support, ongoing maintenance, enhancements, excludes customizations).
**Customizations to Investor, Borrower/Issuer, and Admin Portals** (if needed outside the regular release schedule): USD 125 per hour.
**Brady Matthews**: USD 150 per hour - smart contract maintenance plus UI/UX of the TrueFi website and other online assets owned by TrueFi (Any effort towards the customization of Investor, Borrower/Issuer, Admin Portals will be excluded from this, and charged under customizations at USD 125 per hour).
**Ravi Srivastava**: USD 125 per hour (includes support for new product and technology leadership, and development, technology infrastructure, foundational work, regulatory analysis/compliance, community coordination, joint business development, etc.)
**Governance Steps**
As the proposal does not fall under the simplified governance exemptions, the proposal will require the following steps:
1. Forum Posting: A 72-hour posting period on the forum to allow the community to provide feedback.
2. Snapshot Vote: A 48-hour Snapshot vote will be conducted with the options: “OK to vote on Tally,” “Not OK to vote on Tally,” and “Abstain.” At least 5% of staked TRU must participate in this Snapshot vote to meet the quorum.
3. Amendment Period: If the 5% quorum is met, with a majority negative vote, a 72-hour period will follow to allow for any amendments or discussions before the proposal is posted to Tally.
4. Tally Vote: Otherwise, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
# [TFIP 20] Discontinuation of Cicada Partners Managed Pools and Services
Background:
On April 11, 2024, Cicada Partners proposal to manage credit pools via introduction of borrowers was passed and executed.
See:
<img height="24" width="24" src="https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bbe5ce/48.png" /> [\[TFIP-11\] Rebuilding a Risk-Managed Crypto-Native Lending Vertical on TrueFi](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-11-rebuilding-a-risk-managed-crypto-native-lending-vertical-on-truefi/1602) [Proposals](https://forum.truefi.io/c/proposals/7)
> Background: As we enter another crypto bull market, the supply of crypto-native lending has radically transformed following the demise of Genesis, Celsius, BlockFi, Babel, Voyager, et al. Lending to crypto trading firms previously accounted for >90% of crypto lending volumes and based on our estimates still accounts for >95% of volumes even when including the recent $800m+ in T-Bills on chain as “lending”. Nascent market infrastructure creates market fragmentation, which drives inefficiency and…
The goal of this proposal was to help Truefi with TVL by creating pools for borrowers in which to attract lenders to place capital in such pools. Cicada was tasked with the responsibility to source such borrowers.
However, gaining traction on this vertical has been slow at best, with total TVL of these pools totalling about 2.2 million USD, with more than 90% of the lending coming from two addresses.
In the meantime, Truefi DAO has paid:
1.15 million TRU on initiation of this service on April 11th
1.85 million TRU on Sablier Stream between April 16th and Sep 28th 2024 (about 1.5 million so far paid in the stream)
And
1 Million TRU paid as a incentive payment for opening 3 borrower pools.
Truefi using about 0.13 USD per token has paid nearly $500,000 of tokens in 4 months for these services, resulting in 2.2 million TVL and sub few thousand dollars of revenue. This has resulted in a fairly disadvantageous economic arrangement for the DAO.
With other incentives potentially coming with disproportionate payments for work versus results, it is value enhancing to discontinue the services provided by Cicada.
Further, for the DAO to continue to attempt to create a “crypto-native” trading firm related lending vertical is a losing game. Instead of trying time again (and again) on this among competitors, the DAO should look to expend its resources and strategy elsewhere to showcase the RWA ecosystem.
Macro-Environment for Trading Firm Lending:
As also pointed by Cicada in their proposal, summer-late 2022 brought drastic changes to the meteoric rise of the crypto-native-trading-firm lending/borrowing market with defaults and losses affiliated with the likes of Babel (3% loss to the Orthogonal Credit Maple Pool), Blockfi, Celsius, 3AC, Alameda, Blockwater, Invictus, and Orthogonal Trading. With FTX bankruptcy, trading firms that remained solvent/liquid came under significant pressure with funding being recalled across all lenders, while questioning whether leverage can even be used given the post FTX counterparty risk concentrations that would arise to them.
Among institutions, whale individuals, and projects from that era, can easily point to some within 1 degree of separation who were burned from at least one of these defaults.
Firstly, trust on the under-collateralised or un-collateralised lending evaporated. Any lenders or would be lenders (who have friends who were burned) have more or less refrained from lending unless with trading firms which have long extensive relationships. Even at two years after these events, we see significant reluctance for lenders to lend to newly formed relationships.
Secondly, the largest borrowers who have survived from the previous era, have not come back to lending platforms to borrow – previous borrowers such as Wintermute, Folkvang, Nibbio, Amber, Mgnr, GSR, amongst others. The counterparty risk mismatch with trading partners and lenders have still proven to be a challenge to many firms.
As such, even looking at Clearpool for example, the TVL for dynamic pools are at around 12 million dollars, with lending/borrowing concentrated among three borrowers; Bastion, Auros, and Portofino (Portofiino are under a lawsuit from Citadel). Maple’s uncollateralized pool has 1 borrower and about only 5 million dollars of TVL.
The chances of having this kind of lending-borrowing ecosystem succeeding looks bleak for any player, let alone Truefi. There is little downside to pivot now for Truefi. Furthermore, resource expenses to continue down this path of under/un-collateralised lending is very high. In fact, Fasanara with the highest of credit rating from Credora is at 0 TVL despite the pool being launched.
Interoperability is a key word currently within the classic competitors of Truefi. Maple has launched Syrup to add flexibility to its offerings across all of DeFi. Clearpool has create Ozean, a new L2 blockchain designed for RWA which I believe is envisioned to onboard a network of users beyond the Clearpool ecosystem.
Through one iteration or another, the current borrowers are also or has onboarded with either Clearpool, Idle, and/or Maple. Lenders with any experience are intimately familiar with all of these protocols. Rather than to compete for a limited opportunity set for what is currently a same narrow set of borrowers and lenders, Truefi should seek new pastures, different opportunities, and new partners to increase the utility of the TRU token.
For everyone’s mutual benefit, it is best to make decisions in a timely manner on what way is forward or to take an alternative path. In this case, in the backdrop of tough product market fit and expensive costs for TVL acquisition it is best for Truefi and Cicada to go down separate paths at this point.
On-Chain Tally Actions:
Mint 1 TRU as a memorialize the discontinuation of contract. 
Additional 1000 TRU minted to cover Tally Fees.
# [TFIP-19] TrueFi Forward Vision and Operational Expense Request
# Background:
TrueFi was originally an ecosystem built around the stablecoin TUSD as one of the first stablecoins in crypto from the 2017/2018 vintage. In 2020, TrueFi pivoted as an ecosystem to house credit-related vaults and these vaults allowed for borrowers (mainly crypto trading firms) to interact with lenders for stablecoin funds. By 2022 it was one of the largest protocols of its kind with peers like Maple Finance and Clearpool. However, from spring to winter 2022, saw a near annihilation of these credit-linked markets with bankruptcies such as 3AC, Celsius, Babel, Orthogonal, and Alameda/FTX. Many of these have also been tied with strong accusations of fraud and misrepresentation to its now claimants. TrueFi’s active TVL shrank to near zero by early 2023.
Since about September 2023, Truefi (or its vaults) have been used for the following, with a Real World Asset (“RWA”) theme:
* Adapt3r Whitelisted T-Bill Vault (housed at app.archblock.com): 13.5 million USD
* Kryptonim Whitelisted Credit: 0.5 million USD
* Gravity Team/Wincent/Fasanara (Cicada related): 2.1 million USD
Revenues that have been generated or collected from the vaults are currently at sub few thousand dollars.
Yet, hundreds of thousands of dollars (in fact, millions) of value in stablecoins and Tru tokens have been paid out to develop the vault technology and on efforts to bring users to the platform.
Nonetheless, The DAO has an opportunity to take a competitive segment of the RWA market, and we are already excited by the discussions that we have had with service providers. TrueFi has the name, product, and partners to evolve in the right direction.
# Moving Forward - Strategy:
While RWA has immense potential in its next iterations to come there are many question marks just how the adoption will look like and more importantly when it will come.
How to deal with the uncertainty? The first solution is to build and house products that allow for enhancing the user experience with RWA brought on-chain but are also not RWA-exclusive. Before, Truefi was considered a CeDeFi protocol and with loan managers and such, there was a emphasis on the Ce (Centralised) portion, but now for flexibility, there’s much merit to place more emphasis on the De (decentralised) portion.
The board has thought of plans to create enhanced versions of innovative products that can fit the bill, with manageable costs to build it. As the plans may be materially economically impactful, specific plans are yet to be divulged. Through the onboarded members of the Foundaiton we will construct a more detailed roadmap that will encompass this vision.
We have already been connecting with strategic investors and partners to curate this roadmap, and the board is keen and open to working with any and new counterparts especially in RWA to find/create ecosystems that can net or potentially can net significant value and utility for TRU holders.
Of course, we need to find ways to revive the community. Forum participants are limited. Discord has been turned off for discussion. Twitter has been at a standstill. We want to revive these and revive the awareness of Truefi to the crypto community.
Treasury of the DAO must also be actively managed as well, as expenses are borne in USD (or stablecoin equivalent) and there is uncertainty of payments with TRU price fluctuations. The current treasury looks to consist mostly of yet to be minted Truefi tokens and gives rise to significant payment premiums potentially paid to counterparts and service providers.
# Next Steps:
Starting on the right footing
The DAO (and the foundation as a BVI entity) should gain some legal clarity on its activities. What is viewed as grey, white, or black zones would be helpful. Legal advice should be sought for its current state and help set guidelines for future activities. We have already had advice set for some counterparty onboarding (“KYC”) and anti-money laundering procedures.
The DAO also should seek to get an update of the financial standing both from a historical and current perspective. For example, versus how much of tokens being expended, how much revenue is being collected. There is also looking at how to deal with legacy assets such as funds in vaults potentially.
The DAO Foundation should also ensure that assets that belong to the DAO and in the name of the Foundation have been properly handed over. These assets include multi-signature wallets and its assets, vault operations, websites and social media channels. These are noted on the following Tally votes:
* Tally | TrueFi | Assignment Agreement between Archblock Inc. and TrueFi Foundation Ltd.
* Tally | TrueFi | \[TFIP-7] Decentralize admin and owner rights to smart contracts (Second Attempt)
But this is not an exhaustive list of items that would need to be audited or be in a handover process of the DAO and in the name of the Foundation.
Expanding headcount and outsourcing for the benefit of DAO stakeholders:
Currently, there are only the 2 directors, Ferengi and Nathan on the payroll as the Foundation Directors alongside the 2 community moderators. Cicada as a borrower introducer is the only other entity being paid as Wallfacer has not had a 2H 2024 contract passed by vote. Expenses are required for:
* Legal Advice from Outside BVI Counsel
* On-chain and financial auditing
* Additional Community or Outreach person
* Operations and Administrative Coordinator
* Day to day website user interface (“UI”) and user experience (“UX”) tech managers
* Smart contract maintenance (could be in conjunction with 5)
* New product development from technology standpoint
* New product or counterparts liaison specialist
* Compliance related personnel (from onboarding service providers, projects, and making sure that the DAO Foundation acts in a compliant manner)
* Additional directors
Of course, there are significant costs to this to get on the right footing and to start expanding. More details on activities to be pursued are also noted on the budget below.
### Budget – Financial Overview
6 months of operating expenses, covering essential areas like governance, operational costs, and community initiatives. The proposal also includes setting a budget for future expenses and strategic development at an estimated 1,175,000 USD
The proposed budget will take a ~30% earmark in TRU’s token price at the execution of the proposal before being swapped into stablecoins. This is to consider price fluctuations before the TRU to USDC/USDT conversion.
A multi-signature wallet will be created and owned by the Directors to manage this before we directly manage service provider operational costs through a bank account
Any excess funds will be reported to the DAO at the end of the six months and quarterly reports will be provided to the community
# Next Governance Steps
1. Set up TrueFi Foundation Treasury Wallet (3-out-of-4 multisig) which has been tested by the Board and dedicated community members (0xC03151bAc97F692e5b71Eb49635A624141f7477b)
	[@vandynathan](https://www.tally.xyz/u/vandynathan) ( 0xE416dE13e7859Ba860de0DE3563dA1e4e97dbd97)
	[@ferengi](https://www.tally.xyz/u/ferengi) (0x25022f216b97641d396e6Efe68ba45F80AD7A56b)
	[@StrategoHoldings](https://www.tally.xyz/u/strategoholdings) (0x623EeaAe05FB5A4Be01D45613928d4233da80Fd7)
	[@Marcus\_Leanos](https://www.tally.xyz/u/marcus_leanos) (0x57cD8ecAA060C857B23f9C68853f09dFfC3b7453)
2. Tally Vote: The proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote minting and sending an estimated 1,175,000 USD worth of TRU including a ~30% earmark in TRU’s token price at the execution of the proposal
# TFIP-18 Credit Risk Manager: Asset-Backed Lending and Expanding RWA Scope
Model 2, Renewal & Expansion to ABL Facilities:
Cicada requests a 1/3rd base grant and 2/3rds performance grant from the DAO to support our efforts to commercialize TrueFi Lines of Credit and Credit Vaults. Our ask is to expand the DAOs RWA capabilities by offering lending facilities for [asset-backed lines of credit](https://docsend.com/view/vrf5afwgxezqhrc5). To enable this, we ask for an extension of the timeline to give us greater visibility given loan durations are 6-9mths in tenor:
1. Base Grant: 4.5M TRU tokens, 30% front-loaded, remainder vested over 9 months.
2. TVL-Based Performance Grant: We recommend three tiers of TVL-based performance compensation. If aggregate TVL across Cicada underwritten vaults exceeds $10/25/75M as outlined below, TRU rewards step up by 1/2/3M, respectfully.
3. Vaults Underwritten: Additionally, we recommend three tiers of underwriting-based performance compensation.
4. To align incentives, but lock in a reasonable range of TRU-based pay for both sides, we’d request to get paid in a fixed amount of TRU tokens.
# TrueFi Board of Directors Compensation (H1 - 2024)
#### [](#p-4553-introduction-1)**Introduction**
We are maintaining the core TrueFi operations, as we move into the next stage of TrueFi’s development, the Board of Directors will be collaborating more closely with our service providers to scale both current and future TrueFi offerings.
#### [](#p-4553-increased-workload-and-board-member-replacement-2)**Increased Workload and Board Member Replacement**
With the transition demanding more time and effort from the Directors than initially anticipated, we are in the process of looking for someone to replace the resigned Board member and have discussed increased support from service providers.
#### [](#p-4553-transparency-in-board-activities-and-compensation-3)**Transparency in Board Activities and Compensation**
In the spirit of transparency, we have outlined the total hours worked by the Board over the past 7 months, on top of the regular 4 hours per week. This can be found here: [https://forum.truefi.io/t/truefi-board-of-directors-update-and-compensation/1820](https://forum.truefi.io/t/truefi-board-of-directors-update-and-compensation/1820)
### Duration
* Period: January 2024 to July 2024
### Compensation
* Source: DAO Treasury
* Preferred Currency: TRU tokens
#### ETH Addresses
* Joseph Appolos: 0x79aB78Fe4b4B166da1B868527E587bc9b8B6A3AE
* Emmanuel Boamah: 0xc2069e336596adbef917d8af715610f221d848db
Given the price volatility, the current TRU price ($0.08436 - [source](https://www.binance.com/en-AE/trade/TRU_USDT?type=spot)) with a 25% buffer will be provided to calculate TRU amounts. 
**1000 additional TRU** will be minted to account for the Tally transfer fee.
This proposal:
* Mints **1,072,715 TRU** TRU
* Transfers **228025 TRU** to Ferengi to 0x25022f216b97641d396e6efe68ba45f80ad7a56b
* Transfers **644169 TRU** to vandynathan to 0xb381FF1f6796528bf6237319De47eEc600c88F0A
* Transfers **199522** **TRU** to Masahide to 0x44b14569D3e25260d6D40C54Eb33997698912754 
# Contract Extension For Community Moderators - H2 2024 (re-up)
## Summary
Joseph Appolos (@solexj1000) and Emmanuel Boamah (@emmagh) request payment to extend their community moderation term.
## Terms for Extension
### Duration
* Period: July 2024 to December 2024
### Compensation
* Source: DAO Treasury
* Preferred Currency: TRU tokens
* Payment Method: \*[Sablier](https://sablier.com/) \*\* payment streams
* Monthly Amount: **$500 total ($250 per person)**
#### ETH Addresses
* Joseph Appolos: 0x79aB78Fe4b4B166da1B868527E587bc9b8B6A3AE
* Emmanuel Boamah: 0xc2069e336596adbef917d8af715610f221d848db
Given the price volatility, the current TRU price ($0.0837 - [source](https://www.binance.com/en-AE/trade/TRU_USDT?type=spot)) with a 25% buffer will be provided to calculate TRU amounts. Each of them should receive: **22,401 TRU**
**1000 additional TRU** will be minted to account for the Tally transfer fee.
This proposal:
* Mints **45,802** TRU
* Transfers **22,401 TRU** to Solex 0x79aB78Fe4b4B166da1B868527E587bc9b8B6A3AE
* Transfers **22,401 TRU** to emmagh 0xc2069e336596adbef917d8af715610f221d848db
# [TFIP-16.1] Restoration of gov procedures & reassignment of CANCELLER multi-sig
## [](#p-4518-summary-1)Summary
This proposal below builds on the previous \[[TFIP-16](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-16-restoration-of-governance-procedures-and-reassignment-of-canceller-multi-signature-wallet/1781)] maintaining the previously mentioned governance improvements while modifying the technical process of changing the new CANCELLER role. This means both the revocation of the old multisignature and approval of the new one will be completed in one transaction.
## [](#p-4518-abstract-2)Abstract
As part of the current transition, there is a clear need to (1) reinstate the governance procedures and (2) implement a committed, business, and technically adept group of individuals on the CANCELLER role to ensure no potentially malicious proposals.
The community has aggregated some candidates including Board members and long-term, aligned community members, to act as new holders of the canceller multi-signature wallet. The following steps will be implemented.
#### [](#p-4518-h-1-maintenance-of-previously-mentioned-governance-amendment-3)1. Maintenance of previously mentioned governance amendment
Firstly, the previous governance amendments mentioned in \[[TFIP-16](https://forum.truefi.io/t/tfip-16-restoration-of-governance-procedures-and-reassignment-of-canceller-multi-signature-wallet/1781)] will be maintained and implemented to improve the governance process.
> ### Proposal for Governance Restoration
> **Compliance with Governance Protocols:
> All forum proposals must follow the TFIP structure, be subject to a 3–5 day discussion period, and include a “For” or “Against” poll.
>
> **Enhancing Community Engagement:** Encourage active participation from all community members to improve engagement and decision-making.
>
> **Board’s Role in Reviewing Proposals:** As part of the transition of Wallfacer being the core service provider and according to the initial proposal for the Board’s role, the [Foundation](https://medium.com/trust-token/truefi-dao-step-2-announcement-of-dao-foundation-196cc7a5f0e0) will take over the multi-signature wallets connected to the Canceller function. The Board’s role includes reviewing incoming and approved Timelocked proposals for modifications or outright veto.
>
> **Neutrality and Conflict of Interest:** DAO Board members are elected by, serve at the pleasure of, and may be terminated by stkTRU holders. The neutrality of the Board’s individual Directors is crucial. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed and mitigated promptly. It is likely that service providers may come from the network of current TrueFi participants, mitigating these potential conflicts of interest as seen in the Teragon proposal which disclosed Bastion Trading as an advisor and enabled the Directors to maintain neutrality through an internal Chinese wall [allowing members to voice their singular opinions independently](https://forum.truefi.io/t/malicious-governance-attack-a-call-to-action-to-stop-the-attack-opine-in-the-next-42-hours/1746/37) . Furthermore, Cicada and Wallfacer noted that they would potentially have a conflict of interest regarding the canceller vote on the Teragon on-chain proposal and decided to abstain. Such transparency and community support are essential, aligning with the suggested canceller wallet policy.
>
> **Board’s Role in Onboarding and Compliance** The Board primarily supports the governance, legal, and compliance process for the TrueFi protocol, including onboarding new partners. The Board will support the enforcement of the established governance protocols in the future. Additionally, it is suggested that partners should onboard before their proposal goes on-chain to ensure compliance with our required AML laws. This process protects the DAO and limits the need for the Canceller function in the future, as partners will be aligned internally; be able to discuss confidential, commercially sensitive information; and the provision of KYC documents will act as a deterrent to harmful behaviour.
>
> **Simplified Governance and Snapshot Utilization** In response to concerns regarding the complexity of governance and the low participation, we propose a more streamlined approach. A middle ground, requiring a longer process using Snapshot for significant developments, while allowing exemptions for renewals and minor adjustments.
>
> **1. Termination of Contracts:**\* Exemption: The termination of a contract proposed by the Board of Directors due to reasons such as legal risks, failure to reach KPIs, and other risks can be exempted from the lengthy Snapshot process to allow for swift action.
> **2. Status Quo:**\* Exemption: Renewals of existing agreements or minor adjustments previously mentioned in a TrueFi Improvement Proposal (TIP) can skip the extended Snapshot process.
> **3. Smaller Treasury Adjustments:**\* Exemption: Treasury adjustments including swaps of TRU to ETH, WBTC, or stablecoins below 1.5 million USD can skip the extended Snapshot process.For these exempted proposals:\* A 72-hour voting period on the forum will be required.\* A forum poll, if deemed necessary, will be conducted.\* A 72-hour Tally vote will be held.\*
> **Proposed Changes for Non-Exempted Proposals:** For proposals not falling under the above exemptions:\*
> **1. Forum Posting:**\* A 72-hour posting period on the forum is required to introduce the proposal.* **2. Snapshot Vote:**\* A 48-hour Snapshot vote will be conducted with the options: “OK to vote on Tally,” “Not OK to vote on Tally,” and “Abstain.”
> * At least 5% of staked TRU must participate in this Snapshot vote to meet the quorum.
> * **3. Amendment Period:**\* If the 5% quorum is met, with a majority negative vote, a 72-hour period will follow to allow for any amendments or discussions before the proposal is posted to Tally.
> * **4. Tally Vote:**\* After the amendment period, the proposal will be posted to Tally for the final vote.
> * During this time, TrueFi Foundation will ensure the onboarding of the client and proposed business, assuming all other qualifications are met and there are no technical or procedural issues warranting the Canceller’s intervention.
> * **Clear Definition of the Canceller Role:** It’s vital to define the Canceller role, which reviews approved and Timelocked proposals, with the power to freeze code merges or veto proposals if they are deemed harmful to the protocol or its users.
> * **Canceller Function Usage** We propose the following criteria for the Canceller function:
> 1. Any Tally Transaction not referenced in the Truefi Forum (and obviously relevantly referenced) will be cancelled.
> 2. Any Tally Transaction that is notified to have a legitimate technical flaw will be cancelled.
> 3. Any Tally Transaction (even if there is a corresponding Forum Proposal) where the Proposed Partner party has not been onboarded (KYC and AML cleared) will be cancelled for transactions where more than 5,000 USD value is being transferred.
> 4. Any Tally Transaction that does not follow the following procedure will be cancelled:
> 5. A forum post must be made with the appropriate “\[TFIP-XX]” prefix in the title with the next sequential number of the TFIP on it. The category of the post must be made to be “Proposal”.
> 6. The TFIP must be left for 96 hours before a vote on Tally vote is initiated.
> 7. There must be an announcement by the proposer that the vote would be on Tally by the initial proposer on the forum prior to placing the proposal on Tally.
> 8. The proposal must include at least a description of each Tally transaction to be submitted.
> 9. The Tally Transactions must coincide with the description of the Tally Tx on the Proposal.
> 10. A proposal must also provide the terms and conditions that the DAO can unilaterally terminate its arrangement with the service provider (if it is relevant). Such examples are termination upon not meeting interim KPI metrics.
> 11. A proposal must also acknowledge that payment streams (Sablier streams) as part of their service contract may be terminated despite the best efforts of the DAO and cancellers, and/or incentive payments proposed via future tally payments are subject for such proposals passed by a quorum and majority votes at that time, even if KPIs were completed. The DAO and Foundation are not responsible for these circumstances.
> 12. A proposal must provide a procedure for any handing off items at the end of the contract to the DAO (or Foundation) including a timeline.
> 13. The proposal must have a set of terms and conditions that can be mostly transferred to a legal agreement between TrueFi Foundation Ltd and the counterparty where the contract value is greater than 5,000 USD, with satisfaction to the Board. The Board cannot unreasonably refuse that the terms and conditions are not in such format. An agreement draft may be provided (with NDA) to the TrueFi Foundation if significant parts of the agreement should be private.
> 14. Extraordinary Discretionary Cancellations: If the Board, each individually, believes that the Forum Proposal was passed through highly divergent economics or control metrics from standard practices, then the Board has the right to use the Canceller function. Either on the forum or on-chain, reasons for the cancellation must be provided by each who has canceled the passed tally vote.If governance rules are not met, the Board must unanimously vote to cancel and will approach the additional cancellers to use their address. If all the rules are followed, but there is still potential harmful activity a canceller believes merits the use of the Canceller function, then cancellers must provide adequate reasoning.
#### [](#p-4518-h-2-creation-of-new-multisignature-wallet-4)2. Creation of new multisignature wallet
Rather than each holder of the current wallet transferring their rights to a new wallet, it has been suggested that a completely new wallet should be created. The canceller rights on the old multisignature wallet should be revoked and canceller rights to the new wallet should be approved.
Therefore, the proposed candidates have built a new multisignature wallet that will be 2 persons connected to the Board, and 4 long-time community members:
* [@vandynathan](/u/vandynathan) ( **0xE416dE13e7859Ba860de0DE3563dA1e4e97dbd97**)
* [@ferengi](/u/ferengi) (0x25022f216b97641d396e6Efe68ba45F80AD7A56b)
* [@TylerEther](/u/tylerether) (0xc8A69971DAa3C3ADd85Ab0d0AF297515769ddfFC)
* [@StrategoHoldings](/u/strategoholdings) (0x623EeaAe05FB5A4Be01D45613928d4233da80Fd7)
* [@Marcus\_Leanos](/u/marcus_leanos) (0x57cD8ecAA060C857B23f9C68853f09dFfC3b7453)
* [@cicadasefton](/u/cicadasefton) (0xb6F4542a1Fc32C7Ff69303Cb8ED0Ec4404252119)
Multisignature threshold is 4/6 and can be found here:
**0x38358B194A863d40677D774823e6Fc922a100471**
#### [](#p-4518-h-3-tally-proposal-for-the-revocation-and-approval-of-canceller-multisignature-wallets-5)3. Tally proposal for the revocation and approval of canceller multisignature wallets
Thirdly, a Tally proposal would need to call Timelock’s (“0x4f4AC7a7032A14243aEbDa98Ee04a5D7Fe293d07”) and include two actions:
#### [](#p-4518-a-revoke-role-6)A) Revoke Role:
**This will revoke access on the previous canceller multisignature wallet to canceller rights**
revokeRole(role, account) function with args:
revokeRole (“0xfd643c72710c63c0180259aba6b2d05451e3591a24e58b62239378085726f783”,“0x8c8FcA3812c4272756120E207D3ED496A73Bc528”)
#### [](#p-4518-b-grant-role-7)B) Grant Role:
**This will provide access on the new multisignature wallet to canceller rights**
grantRole(role, account) function with args:
grantRole(“0xfd643c72710c63c0180259aba6b2d05451e3591a24e58b62239378085726f783”, “0x38358B194A863d40677D774823e6Fc922a100471”)
### [](#p-4518-next-steps-8)Next Steps
* **Implementation:** Upon a successful Forum proposal, the final proposal will be brought to all stkTRU holders for an on-chain vote on Tally. If approved, the necessary actions will be executed automatically with the Canceller role will be transferred to the multi-signature wallet controlled by the Independent Board of Directors and the mentioned individuals.
# Contract Extension For Community Moderators - H2 2024
## Summary
Joseph Appolos (@solexj1000) and Emmanuel Boamah (@emmagh) request payment to extend their community moderation term.
## [](#proposed-terms-for-extension-11)Terms for Extension
### [](#duration-12)Duration
* Period: July 2024 to December 2024
### [](#compensation-13)Compensation
* Source: DAO Treasury
* Preferred Currency: TRU tokens
* Payment Method: \*[Sablier](https://sablier.com/) \*\* payment streams
* Monthly Amount: **$500 total ($250 per person)**
#### [](#eth-addresses-14)ETH Addresses
* Joseph Appolos: 0x79aB78Fe4b4B166da1B868527E587bc9b8B6A3AE
* Emmanuel Boamah: 0xc2069e336596adbef917d8af715610f221d848db
Given the price volatility, the current TRU price ($0.0837 - [source](https://www.binance.com/en-AE/trade/TRU_USDT?type=spot)) with a 25% buffer will be provided to calculate TRU amounts. Each of them should receive: **22,401 TRU**
**1000 additional TRU** will be minted to account for the Tally transfer fee.
This proposal:
* Mints **45,802** TRU
* Transfers **22,401 TRU** to Solex 0x79aB78Fe4b4B166da1B868527E587bc9b8B6A3AE
* Transfers **22,401 TRU** to emmagh 0xc2069e336596adbef917d8af715610f221d848db
# [TFIP-16] Restoration of gov procedures and reassignment of Canceller multi-sig
# Summary:
This proposal aims to restore and establish general, forum, and Canceller wallet governance procedures while confirming the candidates for the multi-signature wallet.
# Background & Rationale:
To enhance governance integrity in TrueFi, this proposal seeks to reassign the Canceller role to a multi-signature wallet managed by selected community and board members. The objective is to ensure compliance and better community engagement by adhering to established and proposed procedures.
From the initial Forum post, there were no additions to the proposal regarding governance restoration, exempted proposals, the definition of the canceller role, and the function of its usage. 
However, it was suggested that we should maintain having six (6) addresses for security reasons.
Therefore, unless amendments are suggested through the Snapshot vote and amendment period, they shall remain as described in the TFIP-16 proposal.
# Proposed Multi-Signature Wallet Signatories:
Based on the six (6) candidates that came forward, the confirmed multi-signature wallet will have a 4-out-of-6 policy for approvals.
## Community Members:
@TylerEther (0xc8A69971DAa3C3ADd85Ab0d0AF297515769ddfFC)
@StrategoHoldings (Stratego.eth)
@Marcus\_Leanos (0x57cD8ecAA060C857B23f9C68853f09dFfC3b7453)
@cicadasefton (0xb6F4542a1Fc32C7Ff69303Cb8ED0Ec4404252119)
## Board of Directors:
@vandynathan (0xCd263ADcD76e4d81CB7EA6Ad32447d2810f37e13)
@ferengi (0x25022f216b97641d396e6Efe68ba45F80AD7A56b)
# Next steps
## Implementation:
If the on-chain Tally vote passes, the governance process will be re-established as outlined, and the Canceller role will be transferred from the current holders to the Independent Board of Directors and the mentioned individuals. 
The onboarding process for partners will also be implemented as described.