Polkadot Parachain Assets Onramp Bounty Program
The goal of this referenda is to approve the Bounty 27.
Dear Polkadot Community,
I am Zhixi from Interlay. This post propose a comprehensive bounty program aimed at funding the fiat on-ramp service for 20 parachains and the onramp integration for Asset Hub in the Polkadot ecosystem.
The on-ramp service has been a prominent concern within the Polkadot and Kusama ecosystems, creating barriers to entry for new users. These barriers arise from issues such as fragmented token liquidity, high costs associated with listing on exchanges, and the lack of tailored solutions for substrate chains. To address these challenges, we have diligently researched and engaged in insightful interviews with a diverse range of on-and-off-ramp service providers, and have had extensive conversations with various projects within the ecosystem.
In March 2023, we proposed an on-chain bounty on Kusama to secure funding for the on-ramp of 11 assets on 10 parachains. The proposal outlined a strategic collaboration with Banxa, a leading on-ramp service provider, in the form of a bulk deal between parachains and Banxa. The selection of Banxa was a result of meticulous evaluation, considering factors such as technical expertise, extensive geographic coverage, supported payment methods, and competitive pricing.
I am pleased to report that our previous bounty proposal received overwhelming support across the Kusama ecosystem, and the integration process commenced swiftly. Throughout the implementation, the bounty proposal was carefully supervised by a curator committee comprising experts representing various facets of the ecosystem.
Building on the success achieved within the Kusama ecosystem, we now aim to bring this bounty program to Polkadot. Our proposal includes 15 assets on 14 parachains, notably including DOT and USDT on Statemint. We also request funding for 6 slots to allow parachains that are not already involved to sign up and take advantage of this service. Another highlight is the integration of Banxa’s onramp service with the Polkadot Asset Hub. By adding these assets, we aim to bridge the gap between traditional payment systems and the Polkadot ecosystem.
It is worth mentioning that the integration of Banxa's fiat onramp service with the Polkadot Asset Hub holds significant implications. It would enable users to purchase assets supported by the Asset Hub directly with fiat currencies and then deposit these assets directly into a designated parachain address, without the extra steps of XCM bridging.
We believe that this bounty program represents a pivotal step towards resolving the fiat on-ramp challenge, encouraging widespread adoption, and fostering a dynamic and inclusive ecosystem. We eagerly await your support and cooperation in making this vision a reality for the Polkadot community.
Costs breakdown: — 1st Batch Token 14 Parachains: 147 000 USD — Reserve funding for 6 parachains: 63 000 USD — Asset Hub Integration: 84 000 USD — Management Overhead: 32 040 USD
Total: 326 040 USD
Please see Link to Full Proposal , and leave your feedback in the comment section below!
View Discussion Post
A bounty proposal for the same purpose has been live and running on Kusama, it has achieved both approval and notable success. Should you have an interest, we are pleased to present a report on its performance. Link to report
Comments (12)
Proposal Passed
Summary
0%
Aye
0%
Nay
Aye (92)0.0 DOT
Support0.0 DOT
Nay (72)0.0 DOT
This looks utterly surreal:
— Interlay, which is involved with a Bitcoin-focused parachain
— A payment provider that will somehow enter other parachains (we don’t even know if they need this)
— A payment system that, in practice, should be offered by wallets and integrated on their side (the commission will still be paid somewhere in this circuit).
— Also there are some already existing players like Moonpay, with huge traction and rich KYC base
It's as strange as it can get.
@ProposalCritic I will try to address your points but it is a bit tough as they do not really explain what your concerns are in particular.
_— Also there are some already existing players like Moonpay, with huge traction and rich KYC base
_
We spoke to Moonpay, Transak, and many other smaller providers. None will spend time on integrating Polakdot parachains natively. Maybe if you have an EVM and are as big as Moonbeam or Astar, and your token is listed on Binance they will support you.
Banxa's on-ramp works well, is supported in Metamask (so arguably has a big enough KYC base), has been proactive in getting this to work on Polkadot, took the time & risk of engaging with Polkadot governance rather than expecting a B2B company deal, and is ready to dive deeper into the mechanics of XCM to make access to stablecoins easier.
_— A payment provider that will somehow enter other parachains (we don’t even know if they need this)
_Please see the list of parachains that have already signed up, went through the onboarding process, and partially already integrated with Banxa ahead of this proposal. I would suggest this is a clear indication of demand for an on/off-ramp.
_— A payment system that, in practice, should be offered by wallets and integrated on their side (the commission will still be paid somewhere in this circuit).
_This in fact will be supported by wallets, starting with Talisman. But you need to get the tokens supported first and the infrastructure built to get USDT from exchanges to parachains without the user having to do click through 5 interfaces manually.
— Interlay, which is involved with a Bitcoin-focused parachain
I am not sure how to address this and why this is a critique. Why do you see a problem with Interlay spending hours and hours doing ecosystem BD? Even if we are a "Bitcoin-focused" parachain, we care about Polkadot having been here for 4 years. Without access to assets, nothing works.
Hello, we supported the Kusama proposal and we support this Polkadot proposal. One small question though, is there any update on the issue of shortening the requirement for SS numbers for US clients? This was brought up during the AAG presentation.
@saxemberg Asking Banxa to provide more context on this — TLDR from what I have been told, this is a requirement by their US partner but they are working on fixing this and we should see better UX in 2024.