Content
@
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
Noun 40
@noun40
discourse around DUNA seems to be focused around the downsides (added KYC requirement to grantees) imo DUNA's massive upsides are: - reducing tax risk - providing limited legal liability to members while still allowing: - members to remain anonymous (privacy) - explicit voting rights to members if there are other avenues to achieve the above without any compromises then that would be wonderful, but as far as i know at the moment DUNA is unique in offering the above properties with limited compromises (paying taxes in the US, KYC req for grantees). more thoughts continued 👇
7 replies
55 recasts
159 reactions
Noun 40
@noun40
right now our tax position is that we're based in cayman. the nft auctions are permissionless and global but we tie the tax jurisdiction to the cayman islands via the foundation through the IP that it holds and its veto rights to the treasury. it's not a bad position. it's a position we built through good tax and legal counsel. but it has become increasingly tenuous in the 3 year history of nouns as one could attempt to argue that a good portion of the economic substance of the dao occurs in the US (esports, nouns movie, nouns fest, etc; plus many nouns buyers). i would much rather have a clear jurisdiction where we pay taxes (and in a tax year where treasury spend matches or exceeds auction revenue, the tax bill would be minimal) and it would be natural for that jurisdiction to be where the most amount of economic substance (nouns buying, treasury spending) occurs.
1 reply
0 recast
57 reactions
Noun 40
@noun40
also on legal liability, currently it's very unclear what would happen if someone sued a dao member for legal damages (let's say something went wrong with a prop) or gov bring enforcement action for non-compliance with local regulations. the dao member argue that they are the wrong target. they have no responsibility here. the foundation is the one with control over the treasury and conducting the business activity. but this claim is also tenuous. we like to have explicit token voting rights (token votes aren't some signaling vote that is a recommendation to the foundation). if the claim that the dao = foundation isn't accepted then the court might assume the dao to be a general partnership in the local jurisdiction and it could lead to individual members being liable (such claims have been made in the california court in recent years).
2 replies
0 recast
5 reactions
Bixbite 👽
@bixbite
Are the bylaws of the Foundation available for DAO members to view? Could even be through token gated access? A Cayman Foundation is defined as a legal person, which means the DAO can be a contracting entity and it can: - interact and form contracts with third parties; - file and pay taxes; - open bank accounts and make cash transactions; - hold and protect off-chain assets; - limit the liabilities of its members (if it has members); - protect intellectual property; - serve as a vehicle for airdrops and grants; and - act as a parent or holding entity with subsidiaries to carry out functions for a project. So does the Foundations bylaws limit the liability of its members aka Nouns DAO token holders?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bixbite 👽
@bixbite
DAO does = Foundation….. Foundation owns the IP, Foundation has the veto, Foundation has contracts signed by artists when submitting artwork, Foundation owns the social media account & domain. I don’t think anyone has an issue with this. If there was a legal issue that arises, like the one that previously happened, it was the Foundation that handled that issue. As far as taxes go, out of the funds the DAO previously paid for the Foundation was accounting not included in that? We have been spending much more then we take in, but I think it would be year 1 that would have a tax liability to the Caymens. I’m very anti-Duna & think there are much easier solutions. It’s important to understand everyone’s motivations when major decisions are rushed through. Also, are the minutes available for DAO members to view from the Foundations meeting in June? Or was that just private for the Foundation + Top Holders?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
