Maple has continued to scale since the Syrup Strategic Fund (SSF) was activated under MIP-019 and extended under MIP-020. The SSF has three jobs: pursuing strategic opportunities, supporting token liquidity, and holding capital reserves and buybacks. Over that period, a portion of protocol revenue has been used to buy back SYRUP and build a durable DAO balance sheet.
Based on community feedback, MIP-021 replaces discretionary buyback allocation with a clear, rules-based model that scales the buyback directly with revenue.
MIP-021 proposes:
Buybacks set as a percentage of monthly revenue, increasing as revenue scales:
Monthly revenue under $1.5M = 10% to buybacks
Monthly revenue $1.5M–$2.0M = 20% to buybacks
Monthly revenue above $2.0M = 30% to buybacks
All SSF buybacks will be executed after each month-end, once the revenue figure is finalised.
SYRUP purchased through these buybacks will live within the SSF.
Buyback details will be included in the Transparency page.
The framework applies for six months.
A Rules-Based Buyback
To make buybacks predictable and directly tied to Maple’s performance, MIP-021 introduces a tiered, revenue-based model. The buyback rate steps up as revenue grows: 10%, 20%, then 30%, so the stronger Maple’s monthly revenue, the greater the share directed to buying back SYRUP. This replaces discretion with a clear, verifiable rule.
Transparency
Every SSF buyback will be executed after month-end once revenue is finalised, with the details reflected on the Transparency page, so the community can verify each month’s activity.
Implementation
Should MIP-021 pass, the following will be enacted:
Buyback Rate: set by the monthly revenue band. 10% under $1.5M, 20% from $1.5M – $2.0M, and 30% above $2.0M.
Execution: buybacks performed after each calendar month-end, once the revenue number is finalised.
Reporting: buyback details posted on X and added to the Transparency page.
Duration: the framework applies for six months.
Voting
MIP-021 can be voted on by all SYRUP holders, with the vote scheduled to go live on July 13, 2026 and remain open for 4 days until July 17, 2026.
MIP-021 is a positive step toward predictability, and moving to a rules-based approach is a clear structural win. However, looking at the details objectively, the proposed structure is not a very inspiring development given all that has happened over the past several months.
Under the previous framework, the community anticipated a flat 25% buyback rate. With these new tiered brackets, any month where revenue falls below $2.0M actually results in a lower buyback percentage for holders, which feels like a step backward during lower-performing months rather than an upgrade.
Getting a clear definition on these numbers is vital because ever since staking rewards were removed under MIP-019, this buyback program represents the primary mechanism for the token’s economic value. Because the buybacks form the core of the token’s value proposition, the community needs explicit clarification on whether these tiers are calculated based on gross protocol fees or net revenue after operational deductions. If the calculations are based on net earnings, standard monthly fluctuations could easily leave the protocol sitting in the lower 10% or 20% tiers most of the time, which drastically reduces the incentive for long-term holders.
To make this proposal truly robust and reliable, a few operational gaps should be tightened before the vote. The language surrounding execution timelines should be updated from the vague “once revenue is finalized” to a strict deadline, such as within 5 to 7 business days of month-end, to prevent any operational delays. Additionally, while MIP-021 is forward-looking, it would go a long way in rebuilding trust if the team provided clarity on how the capital from the previous unannounced pause period was utilized. I look forward to seeing how the team addresses these baseline structural details before the voting window opens on July 13.
I think the biggest issue with this proposal is that nothing is planned for the SYRUP once in the SSF. There needs to be a permanent treatment of the buybacks.
MIP-021 should be amended to require that all SYRUP purchased through SSF buybacks be held in a dedicated, public, non circulating Buyback Reserve address, with no sale, transfer, redistribution, incentive use, liquidity use, market making use, OTC use, or strategic deployment permitted unless approved by a separate SYRUP governance vote.
We can’t have the buyback tokens come back later.
A buyback only creates durable value if the token is either burned, retired, locked, or otherwise restricted from reentering supply. If the SSF can later use bought back SYRUP for incentives, liquidity, strategic deals, or OTC transactions without another vote, the buyback is less like capital return and more like inventory management.
For DAO treasury discipline, the amendment separates two valid functions: buying back SYRUP and deploying strategic capital. The SSF can still hold stablecoins, BTC, or other liquid assets for reserves and growth. But SYRUP bought under the buyback program should have a different status from general purpose treasury assets.
The strangest part to me is that you keep leaving a lot of OG investors out. Keep talking about transparancy and structure and all that but having cut off a lot of people. People who believed in a project very often with their last money. Now I hear you say: invest only what you can spare. I do so, for me this is a matter of principle. But I know a lot of people invested the little they had hoping on a better future. Taking not only the profit but even the underlying investment is not ok.
Moving from discretionary SSF buybacks to a rules-based model is the way forward to ensure protocol value accrues to the SYRUP token, so thanks for bringing this proposal forward.
A few suggestions to make specifications more precise (including comments from @MMM and @ZooTv):
Define monthly revenue (for example: “gross protocol fee revenue received by the Foundation/DAO, before operating expenses, excluding treasury gains/losses and one-off items”).
Set up process deadlines (for example “revenue will be published within 7 business days after month-end; buybacks will be completed within 10 business days after publication, unless delayed for legal, market-disruption, or operational reasons, with explanation posted publicly”).
SYRUP bought under this program should be held in a dedicated public Buyback Reserve address, treated as non-circulating and non-voting, and not sold, transferred, used for incentives, liquidity, market-making, OTC transactions, or strategic deals unless separately approved by governance.
Explicitly state that MIP-21 supersedes MIP-019 & MIP-020.
Add an expiry fallback (for example “MIP-021 will apply for an initial six-month period. Before expiry, Maple will publish a retrospective report covering revenue, buybacks executed, SYRUP acquired, average execution price, reserve balances, and any exceptions. The framework will then be submitted to governance for renewal, amendment, or termination. If no renewal, amendment, or termination proposal has passed by expiry, MIP-021 will remain in force for another six months on the same terms. This rollover will repeat until replaced or terminated by governance.”).
This proposal looks to me like we will likely be buying back more Syrup tokens during a bull market and less during a bear market. Have you considered another approach where funds are set aside for future buybacks based on monthly revenues (similar to the approach currently suggested), but instead of buying back at whatever price Syrup trades, you build a buyback reserve where funds are spent only when syrup is trading under a certain P/E ratio (that rule would have to be determined, but I hope you get the idea)?
Lastly, thank you for continuing to work hard for Syrup holders