Can a Token Be Both a Fee-Sharing and a Utility Token Simultaneously? ⎊ Path

Can a Token Be Both a Fee-Sharing and a Utility Token Simultaneously?

Yes, a token can be designed to be both. For instance, a token might be required to pay for transaction fees (utility) while also granting the holder a right to a portion of the protocol's surplus revenue (fee-sharing).

This hybrid design aims to capture value from both consumption demand and investment demand. However, the fee-sharing aspect significantly increases the regulatory risk of being classified as a security, requiring careful structuring.

Distinguish between a Utility Token and a Security Token in the Context of a Reverse ICO

How Does the Fee Tier (E.g. 0.3% Vs 0.05%) of a Pool Affect the Net Profitability against IL?

What Are the Regulatory Implications of Classifying a Token as “Fee-Sharing” versus “Utility”?

How Does the Concept of Controlling a Majority Share Relate to Corporate Takeovers in Finance?

Can a Governance Token Also Be Classified as a Utility Token?

How Do Utility Tokens Differ from Security Tokens in the Context of Regulatory Compliance?

How Can a Hybrid Approach, Combining Both Symmetric and Asymmetric Cryptography, Be Used to Optimize Security and Performance in Online Banking?

How Does a protocol’S Fee-Sharing Mechanism with Stablecoin Holders Impact the Native Token’s Value?

Glossar

Utility Token

Framework ⎊ A utility token, within the context of cryptocurrency, options trading, and financial derivatives, represents a digital asset designed to provide access to a specific product or service within a defined ecosystem, increasingly intertwined with sustainability initiatives.