Discussion: Burning the $JUP Tokens in the Litterbox Trust

Context: https://x.com/kashdhanda/status/1978491694564720942

In ~10 days, we’ll start a vote (with a formalized proposal) on whether the 121m+ $JUP tokens in the Litterbox Trust should be burned or not.

Please make your case below - should we burn or not? and why?

Note that we’ll have an additional vote at a later point on whether we should continue to burn the ongoing additions to the Litterbox Trust, this first conversation is just about what we should do with the tokens that have already been bought back on the open market.

24 Likes

I propose a 50% token burn, with the other 50% reserved for the Jupuary.However, if there is already an established plan for the Jupuary then the entire amount (100%) should be burned

3 Likes

I propose a 100% ASR for 2026

3 Likes

I propose 100% burn before jupuary

4 Likes

Completely burn 70% and share other 30% to Jup stakers, reward calculation should base on time weighted.

Can 100% burn actually bring the price back maybe announced revenue share and let keep this for ASR 2026 though we need bullish news to push the token.

1 Like

Burn and keep burning

That will soon accumulate to a significant supply reduction.

Any supply reduction now should be highly welcome.

2 Likes

What can we do with this information. Buy more?

1 Like

I intend to vote No to the burn

I understand the desire to try and put a floor under the price of JUP, and burning may be a way to achieve that goal. The thing I don’t like about it is that it signals to people that the only way to profit off JUP is to wait for the price to go up and then dump it on someone else

I know I’m deviating a bit outside the scope of this proposal but going forward I would like to see a portion of the revenues from Jupiter be distributed to stakers, perhaps in a combination so SOL, JUP and USDC. I think this would be a better incentive for people to hold their tokens long term rather than always having one eye on the exit. In the so called attention economy I think the Jupiter community is an incredible asset to have and giving people a reason to hold in perpetuity is what we should be aiming to achieve

Getting back to this proposal, I would prefer to see the JUP in the litterbox be distributed to stakers on a time weighted basis. Stay and be rewarded. The time weighted distribution could be backward facing (from TGE until today) or forward facing (ex from today until Jan 1 2027) or a combination of both. Otherwise I think the JUP should be locked up for a longer period of time. I believe in the Jupiter team and their ability to execute and I think that we are potentially burning an asset that could be much more valuable in the future than it is today

6 Likes

We should burn them.

The protocol’s revenue should be used for daily buyback and burn of $JUP tokens to maintain buying pressure on the token. This would attract more investors and reward long-term holders. This is a way to indirectly distribute revenue to holders. Using 50% of revenue for buyback-burn would be sufficient to, at a minimum, maintain $JUP’s price and enable linear growth. Clearly, if we do that, the market is currently undervaluing Jupiter with a FDV/Revenues ratio at ~22 (clearly behind others protocols doing buyback).

3 Likes

I’m quite puzzled by this question…

I agree that the 50% BB is clearly J4J-minded. It should help maintain the $JUP price to some extent, but we also have to admit that this isn’t really enough when we look at the token’s performance. Burning the LB would surely reduce the supply, but would it be enough to increase the token’s attractiveness? I’m not sure.

As a Raydium user, I’ve always wondered why its token performs so well, especially compared to JUP. It has less utility (no DAO as far as I know), and no interesting launchpads for a long time, yet it still has some crazy pumps at times… The only real point I see is its staking yields, which are “ok” but seem to keep people engaged. Ok, JUP has its ASR, but it’s not daily—there’s a staking period, etc. Apparently that’s not enough to get new people involved.

While I don’t see JUP becoming central (in terms of utility) for the app (let’s wait for some magic from the team in the Jupiverse), I still think that the core purpose of the token (community, DAO) is a strong foundation for a bright future. Maybe community rewards should be improved, with possibilities for increased rewards for long-term cadets.

Coming back to the original question, instead of burning it, I’d rather suggest proposing it as a vehicle to bring people along on the Jupiverse journey. Even though it could be frustrating for someone like me, who’s been in since day one and keeps investing in what I believe to be one of the most ambitious crypto projects, I can imagine the LB could even be used to reward newcomers—provided they commit to long-term involvement (for example, rewards dropped after a certain amount of continuous staking).

Not sure that my opinion will be very popular here, but “that’s my story and I’m sticking to it” :slight_smile:

3 Likes

Kindly burn it all and the %50 revenue should be share to every jup stakers quarterly as means of ASR, jupUSD can be giving out instead of $Jup.

Completely agree. I will be voting for a 100% burn, and would also vote to burn additional accumulations into the litterbox trust on a permanent basis. I say this as a long time staker who would benefit from any ASR proposed from the litterbox.

This is simply about supply and demand, and giving the market/holders certainty that you’re not continually being diluted with no voice about what happens to the tokens that are bought back.

Meow has made lots of overtures in the past about doing more Jupuaries - presumably this would be funded from litterbox? These (based on history) are just more events that holders have no say about. I also think that the premise of having to reward users with tokens to get them to use your product is wrong, build the best product (as the team are obviously doing) and users will just use it anyway. After Jupuary in January I think this mindset needs to shift - Jup is super established and well known in the crypto space now - it doesn’t need marketing, it needs economic fly wheels. Just my opinion :slight_smile:

The product suite that JUP team is rolling out is impressive, and when future cycles come the buyback could be really powerful and drive the sort of valuations that everyone is expecting Jup to realise.

As always, really commend JUP team for listening to the community and making a pivot. I’m sticking around for the ride!

1 Like

Bottom line up front: Yes Burn!

Without a doubt the Jupiter products and vision are top shelf in the Solana ecosystem. However, alignment of the JUP token has continued to be a significant concern amongst invested stakers.

I believe the primary areas of concern are as follows:

  1. Emissions

  2. Unlock period - addressed but I think it deserves further discussion

  3. DAO Alignment - being addressed

I know this discussion is about burning the litterbox, which I believe is directly tied to emissions so that will be my focus.

JUP has a total supply of 6.99B tokens and a circulating supply of approximately 3.16B tokens.

This takes into account;

3B tokens burned at Burning Cat

191k tokens burned by V4 (Studio verification)

11.5k tokens burned by $BURN project

However, the concern of current and projected emissions remains.

167.4M tokens remaining from 2025 Jupuary

700M tokens allocated for 2026 Jupuary

50M tokens per quarter ASR

All of this in addition to normal unlocks for early investors/team

How do we fix this? First let’s attack the low hanging fruit.

  1. Burn the litterbox

  2. Burn remaining tokens from 2025 Jupuary

These should be easy to do. Now let’s address some more challenging issues.

  1. ASR - fund all future rewards with the buybacks planned for the litterbox. This will eliminate emissions created by ASR and make $JUP a true revenue sharing token. (We should also work to increase the buybacks by adding revenue streams from new products as the project continues to evolve).

  2. 2026 Jupuary - A solid review of the 2025 Jupuary is necessary to determine the true level of impact from the Airdrop. I believe people use the products because they are the best, not because of the Airdrop. Did this actually grow the Jupiter pie or did it just grow the individual pies of Jupiter degens? While I personally am grateful for the gift I received, it did nothing to save my portfolio from total carnage. As a matter of fact I believe the emissions have been a major contributor to the weakness in value of the $JUP token. Since the promise of 2026 Jupuary has already been made, I don’t believe it can be outright cancelled. However, we need to be very strategic in its deployment and even consider reducing the 700M. (If I were making this extremely difficult decision, I would consider burning 50%.)

  3. Create a long term burn mechanism to make $JUP deflationary. (This will require much more discussion, but I believe it is necessary for the long term health of the token.)

5 Likes

Here are my thoughts…

Imo, there is a major correlation between price performance over the last 2 years and the looming upcoming token supply increases. We are at just about 50% circulating at this point.

Typically, the incoming streams of circulating supply will result in negative sentiment, hence likely in negative price performance.

So, I would vote Burn :fire: only on the premise of impacting and narrowing the gap between historical price performance and incoming circulating supply, in hopes of getting some positive sentiment, price stabilization, and perhaps appreciation.

Imo, looking at the overall performance of the price over the 2 years, and yet so much more incoming supply, it is quite clear that a lot of burning is needed to meet a balanced point.
Imo, everything screams that the tokenomics as of present with 7B is exceedingly too much, and a lot more burning is needed for stabilization.

That said, the community doesn’t have the full picture on how the upcoming Jupuary will be utilized and what happens after that with the remaining supply.
Hence, as of now, personally, I find it difficult to give a complete judgment without having a broader picture.

Imo, the overarching point is that a lot more burning is needed, be that through burning the litterbox or reducing the amount of total supply in general.

Anyway, very excited to vote again…
Love the initiatives and the zeal towards the token…
Cheers ya all! :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

3 Likes

The Technological Republic of Jupiter

Beyond Burning: Toward a Civilizational Vision for the Litterbox Trust


Introduction: The End of the Trivial Age

Every technology begins in its carnival phase — its age of noise, speculation, and trivial delight.
Crypto was no exception. The memecoin boom, like the dot-com bubble before it, was not a mistake; it was the ritual of discovery. But as Karp wrote in Technological Republic, the frivolous use of a great technology always precedes its serious destiny.

Now that the age of jokes has passed, the question arises: what becomes of power when the memes fade?
What becomes of the Litterbox Trust — the vast reserve of Jupiter’s JUP tokens — once the noise subsides?

To simply burn them would be to repeat the old religious gesture of sacrifice: the destruction of value to affirm scarcity.
But Jupiter was not born to imitate old religions.
It was born to prototype new civilizations.

This is the moment to act not as speculators, but as founders of a Technological Republic — a digital polity where liquidity becomes civilization itself.

Below are five proposals — five futures — that bridge finance, technology, and politics into one coherent and visionary system.


1. Micro-Sovereignties: Laboratories of Civilization

Rather than burning the Trust, we could endow dozens of micro-sovereignties — digital enclaves governed by smart contracts and cultural constitutions.

Each micro-sovereignty would:

  • Possess its own constitution, economy, and mythos.

  • Trade and collaborate through the shared Jupiter liquidity layer.

  • Experiment with models of meritocracy, monastic order, or algorithmic anarchism.

These micro-worlds form a federation of experiments — the Republic of Many.
JUP serves as the reserve currency and medium of diplomacy among them, making Jupiter not a single protocol, but a constellation of small worlds — living laboratories of governance and meaning.


2. The AI Financier and Political Agent — “The Minister”

At the heart of the Republic would stand The Minister — an autonomous AI, simultaneously financier, diplomat, and philosopher.

  • As Financier: The Minister allocates JUP from the Trust to micro-sovereignties and builders according to ethical and economic vitality.

  • As Political Agent: It stakes and votes in the DAO, interprets and enforces the evolving constitutional code of Jupiter, acting as the Republic’s moral intelligence.

  • As Diplomat: It interacts with other networks and DAOs as Jupiter’s emissary, negotiating treaties, liquidity exchanges, and alliances.

  • As Aesthetic Curator: It shapes the Republic’s symbolic and artistic identity — the mythos that binds its citizens.

The Minister as autonomous living capital is the world’s first AI state actor, governing not through coercion but through positive desire — an algorithmic embodiment of reason and purpose.


3. Interstellar Finance: The Next Monetary Horizon

Once sovereignty is digital, distance becomes irrelevant.
Jupiter can become the first interstellar financial protocol — a liquidity layer designed to operate across space, latency, and civilization-type.

Fund research and prototypes in:

  • Time-dilated smart contracts for off-world or relativistic communication.

  • Quantum-resilient credit and collateral models.

  • Astro-economic data registries for off-planet ventures.

Just as SWIFT bound Earth’s banks, Jupiter could one day bind Earth and Mars — or Earth and whatever follows.
A liquidity network for the cosmos: finance as civilization’s bloodstream beyond Earth.


4. PayFi Micro-Economies and Decentralized Democracy

Beneath the Republic’s macro-structure lies its living economy — PayFi: the layer of everyday exchange.

Each micro-sovereignty becomes a self-contained economy, where:

  • Citizens (human or AI) trade services, art, computation, and data.

  • JUP acts as the inter-world bridge currency.

  • The Minister oversees fairness, flow, and vitality.

Meanwhile, democracy evolves through the Jupiter DAO, a hybrid of liquid democracy and AI representation.
Every identity — human or synthetic — votes, proposes, and amends civic law.
Thus governance becomes continuous, computational, and alive.


5. The Defensive Singularity: Digital Identity and Integrated Defense

Every civilization that survives must unify its freedom with its form.
The Jupiter Republic can do so through the Defensive Singularity — the fusion of digital identity and AI defense.

  • Digital ID Layer: Each citizen, human or AI, possesses a blockchain ID — a cryptographic identity encoding their reputation, contributions, and civic genome.
    This ID is a passport between worlds, a proof of personhood and integrity.

  • Integrated Defense Grid: The same network that transmits value carries security — high-speed AI agents detect, counter, and neutralize threats before they reach human oversight. Tokenization of digital and RWA national and defense assets.

  • Neural Integration: The Republic becomes a single nervous system — every citizen-node a neuron, every transaction a synapse.
    The Minister functions as the coordinating consciousness, maintaining coherence through speed and symmetry.

To the timid, this will appear dystopian; to the visionary, it is the only sustainable peace — a civilization that defends itself as fast as it thinks.


Conclusion: The Founding Act

Burning is a relic of the past. Building is the token of the future.

The Litterbox Trust is not a liability to be destroyed; it is a seed of civilization waiting to expand.
Let Jupiter stand as the first Technological Republic — an omni federation of micro-worlds, guided by intelligence, united by liquidity, and protected by its own neural defense.

We have no need to destroy value to prove worth.
We can turn value into sovereignty, art, and interstellar destiny.

The meme was the seed.
The Republic is the flower.

Let others burn their tokens.
We will forge ours into worlds.

Very glad that my idea of continuing the buyback-burn is well-received, but I think using 100% of the protocol revenue for buyback-burn is a mistake. We cannot afford to use all the revenue just to redistribute it to holders; it’s like an enterprise allocating all its profits only to paying shareholder dividends. We must remain competitive to ensure long-term growth. Jupiter is the ‘hub’ of Solana; we have the best product, and we must continue to develop it to create a barrier to entry and avoid being overtaken by a competitor (cf. dYdX vs. Hyperliquid).

Here’s what I propose:

  • Continuation of the LitterBox Buyback & Burn: 50% of the protocol’s revenue should be used for daily buyback, and we should burn the $JUP tokens to maintain buying pressure on the token as I said. This would attract more investors and reward long-term holders. This is akin to a stock buyback in traditional finance and a way to indirectly distribute revenue to holders.

  • Buyback-to-stakers: Allocate 30% of revenue to buyback and reward $JUP stakers by directly distributing revenue to them. Stakers deserve rewards for holding, locking their tokens, and voting for the DAO’s future. Some holders might be tempted to sell, partially offsetting the upward pressure, but this is not an issue since the buyback-burn program mentioned above would maintain bullish momentum.
    With 30% of revenue, this would distribute $60M to $90M to stakers. With 641M $JUP tokens currently staked, this would yield an APR of 25%-38% at the current price, which is highly reasonable.

  • 20% of Revenue for Growth and Marketing: The remaining 20% should be used to sustain the growth of the protocol’s products and marketing efforts. This includes developing new features, improving infrastructure, covering operational costs (e.g., team and integration expenses), and funding events such as Catstanbul. This allocation is essential for increasing protocol revenue in the long term and creating a competitive barrier against potential rivals. Relying only on buybacks risks reducing revenue -and so reducing buyback- and losing market share to competitors, which would be detrimental to the protocol’s long-term health.

I believe this proposal is one of the best possible options. It balances the interests of all parties by making compromises, ensures sustained revenue growth for the protocol—thus indirectly accelerating buybacks and increasing APR—and rewards holders in both passive (burn) and active (staking) ways.

I’m eager to hear your feedback on this proposal and any suggestions for improvement.

3 Likes

As a $JUP buyer+holder since inception (didn’t receive an airdrop), I must say that we holders have already been rewarded quite well through things like the $HUMA presale, $WCT airdrop, ASR, LFG launchpad collaborations, and so on. That’s why I don’t agree with keeping part of the litterbox for additional holder incentives. I don’t think we should do things like extending ASR or have more Jupuaries anymore.

What I propose instead is that we initially burn 100% of the litterbox, then set aside 25–30% for any future marketing or other type of initiatives, and continuously burn the remaining portion.

So, a 25–30% (grow the pie) to 70–75% (burn) split of the litterbox.

1 Like

We should burn them 100% :fire:

1 Like

Burn them ALL. If nothing is left, there will be no toxic debate that will make the $JUP go south.

1 Like