Sushi Vesting Merkle Tree Clawback [Temp Check]


The Sushi Vesting Merkle Tree has now been open for claiming for a little over a year now. With the last tree update that included full release of all vested sushi being October 12th 2021, it’s now time to figure out what to do with the Sushi that is still sitting in the distributor.


Currently 10,936,284 SUSHI is still sitting in the Merkle Distributor, at a approx value of $35 million. This proposal/discussion thus is to start exploring what we should do in terms of clawing back the sushi or not. While also determining how much time we should give before performing the clawback.

Clawback will go directly to the Treasury, and will at current amount almost double the amount of sushi in the Treasury.

Will add a poll so we can get a feel how everyone feels on the clawback, with another poll to get a feel on the duration before performing the clawback after an Implementation vote has passed.


Since the distributor has been live for over a year, and txs on the contract have slowed down considerably it may be worth setting a deadline on claiming and performing a clawback. We should give time / awareness so that everyone has plenty of time to make a claim before performing the clawback.


Perform clawback on Sushi Merkle Distributor, with a determined period before clawback is initiated.


Do it


Don’t do it


  • For Clawback
  • Against Clawback

0 voters

Deadline Duration

  • 6 months
  • 3 months
  • 1 month
  • longer?

0 voters

1 Like

Honestly I don’t see the Clawback like the right move. People have earned these SUSHI fair and square and we should not deny them the right to claim whenever they want - it was never mentioned that there will be an end period, so changing the rules may have a negative effect on our image. Of course letting all these funds sitting idle is not the best option either, so maybe we can (right now, without waiting period) use 85% of the total amount for lending on different Kashi pairs or use some part as collateral, borrow stables and invest in something else - all generated income going to the Treasury. The rest 15% will be left for claiming and when this amount goes below 100K SUSHI, some part of the 85% will be transferred back to the Distributor. Thus we can generate some income for the Treasury without denying people right to claim their SUSHI…


I support the clawback as it is idle SUSHI that can be put to better use.

This SUSHI can support development costs, be paired with a stable asset for additional yield, and negotiated for treasury swaps and metagovernance purposes. There is a myriad of possibilities.

@CryptoLamer I agree with the sentiment shared in your comment. Instead, why not opt for the maximum duration or suggest an amendment for a longer duration.

It could be a linear clawback, incentivizing those to claim earlier than later.

P.S. would you mind sharing the contract so we may perform analytics?

yep yep my bad on that, I dropped the contract in a hyperlink (kinda hidden) above but here it is as well: SushiSwap: Merkle Distributor | Address 0xcbe6b83e77cdc011cc18f6f0df8444e5783ed982 | Etherscan


I’m not as well versed in the entire ecosystem as others, so I need some greater input on this before I cast a vote.

As an xSushi holder, is there someone I can go to claim some of the sushi that is sitting idly in the Merkle Distributor? If so, how do I claim.

If there are funds that belong to sushi holders as a result of their staking, I think we need to make a concerted effort to allow them to claim their funds before we conduct a clawback. Should be a sustained and consistent notification effort. After that is completed, I suspect the clawback should be instituted.

yes but also implement something like cryptolamer said, pull back immediately 85% and leave 15% for period that is voted, add sushi if required
0 point in having all that sushi sitting there idly for any moment longer

1 Like

So this is from the first 6 months when sushi started when we had a very large emission rate for farms. Premise was to lock 2/3rds of sushi rewards, and later distribute those locked rewards through the Merkle Distributor after the lock up period. So only those that were farming during the 6 month lockup period will have claims to do on the merkle tree.

Here’s snapshot of original lockup

And Lufy’s proposal on the actual distributor mechanism for the locked up sushi:

I understand the sentiment, but it is also possible that those wallets are lost. (private keys that are forgotten or unrecoverable)

But I agree that we should do everything in our power to contact those people. Like, Etherscan can send messages to a specific address. Furthermore, we can also include that when the sushi gets taken out that the people still have a chance to claim the tokens. This can be done by something akin to reverse vesting (after x period, x % gets locked), or SushiSwap will use that sushi for passive yield, and if those people are back, they can still claim if they request it.

1 Like

Well, I thought I am suggesting exactly that - using the vested sushi to generated some income for the Treasury… Of course you are right that many of these addresses may not be active anymore, but in that case we will just use the sushi forever without actually owning them :slight_smile:

Agree with the clawback, sushi not claimed yet will most likely never be so will be a big waste of money.

But it’s true that these sushi belongs to the people that farmed and not to treasury.

I think we can find an in-between, for example treasury claim 20% of current amount every 6 months until there are no sushi left.
Would gives 2.5 years to people to claim, very safe and legit imo.


Hmm, I am more fan if all the SUSHI get used during the waiting period for safe investing (Sushi lending, TOKE reactor), and each month the Protocol will own 20% of the Sushi as you said.

We talking about a lot of rewards that can be used for the protocol as a whole, and increase xSushi value.

A person were the sushi belongs to can just request his/her/other preferred pronounces SUSHI while the SUSHI is earning yield.

1 Like

Those SUSHI tokens belong to the users who earned them. They are already theirs. Just because we can technically steal them back, doesn’t mean it’s right. I think we should revoke ownership to the contract, so that temptation is gone. Is the owner decides to leave their tokens there for 10 years, that’s up to them. The word ‘claim’ isn’t right in this context, if you change it to ‘withdraw’ it becomes clearer what I’m trying to say.

If it really bothers anyone, Sushi can simply airdrop the large amounts to the wallets. Some of the large amount probably can’t be claimed because it’s owned by a contract?

(Some staking pools have no rewards anymore, already for a long time… should Sushi seize their staked LP?)


Can’t we push it? (Don’t know how many accounts we’re talking) of course minus the gas costs…

FYI, a similar discussion is taking place on Aave:

It may be helpful for context in Sushi’s case.


I can support the clawback.
3-6 months could be enough time for people to hear of the updated decision and collect.
If 1 month was voted for, I would want to see abundant warning from official social media.
Can also support a longer time frame.

I don’t dismiss what Lamer is saying at all. I’m just not sure how efficient deploying that Sushi to Kashi would be, and would not want to see it risked in higher yield earning opportunities, while owed out.

I don’t think it is efficient to leave it there forever, but do believe if such a term was updated, that a respectful amount of time to react to those changes is required.

1 month can seem like a long time when we live it, but to anyone with a life outside, not on crypto twitter. It isn’t that long at all.


I like this suggestion HK.

1 Like

I think doing a %-based clawback linearly over the course of 1-2 years might also be a good option. It’d give people enough time to withdraw and give the treasury a bit more runway.

The withdraw now, farm and refill plan makes a lot of sense as well. I consider the majority of the Sushi in the contract to be burned. Gas has been cheap enough and if those people wanted to claim, they would’ve done so already.

Airdropping the Sushi makes zero sense, the point above still stands. It’d only incur further expenses to the treasury, something we’re trying to do the opposite of.

Think we should start by showing it into people’s faces - show a big banner to everyone who connects their wallet to the interface and has an vested amount pending to be claimed.


Yeah i mean most accounts have maintenance fees for just this reason. To collect idle funds so you dont have to maintain an account into perpetuity. We should institute a small monthly draw that would drain it over a couple years time and this should be policy for anything like this in the future so that there arent idle rewards sitting out there forever. We have to assume that there is some % loss of wallets in everything and shouldnt keep funds victim to a claimant that never comes


I think this is a no-brainer. Unclaimed SUSHI which remains in the vesting contract is significant, ~4.4% of the total supply, setting and publicising a clear deadline on the claim, and those eligable to claim, is perfectly reasonable in my opinion.


On further thought, I agree with @BoringCrypto that it is not the protocol SUSHI but the users.

But I also agree with using the funds for the improvement of the many. Likely, a decent amount of the rewards are not claimed because of gas (the gas cost more than the reward itself), or people just forgot it.

I think we need more information. Information such as: How many addresses can still claim? What can each address claim (to determine if they did not claim because of the lack of reward size)? Are the address death wallets (IMO is a wallet death if they have not execute a transaction in 2 months)? IF the protocol can use the SUSHI what are they going to with it on how does it benefit the protocol as a whole (gives us number)? If an address comes foreword after the deadline (IF this proposal pass) and the owner had x good reason for inactivity, what is the protocol going to say?

We need to have the answer to the earlier mentioned questions before making a choice. Therefore, I added a poll to my comment to indicate if my fellow community member shared my opinion.

  • Yes, we need more info
  • No, we already have enough

0 voters

If we really decide to use the SUSHI, I really want the majority of the rewards to go to the address that could have claimed the SUSHI until each address received rewards equal to the amount of SUSHI that they could have claimed.