Status of the Strategy (Taxes) Tokens Module

The Ton Raffles team is temporarily suspending the Taxes Tokens module. The reason is not related to our infrastructure — it is fully functional, technically sound, and has passed real-world operation. The issue arose due to the actions of an external service.

What happened?
A month ago, Ton Raffles and DeDust reached an agreement to support tokens with a transaction fee (10%). We integrated correctly into their liquidity pool, launched the full mechanics, everything worked stably, users could mint and add liquidity.

After a month, DeDust unilaterally removed the ability to create the old pools that our token relied on. The new pools are incompatible with the current logic: a user can mint the token, but cannot provide liquidity — which breaks the entire flow.

DeDust’s position:
We contacted the DeDust team. Their official statements were:
— «We don’t profit from old pools — that’s why we removed them».
— «The new pool creation page does not support old formats».
— «If you want, write the code to deploy our old pool yourselves».
— They do not care about agreements, handshakes, or previously confirmed decisions
Effectively, DeDust acknowledged that they do not intend to uphold the agreements they themselves approved.

What this means:
1. The Ton Raffles Taxes Tokens module is temporarily disabled.
Until an independent workaround for DeDust’s switches is found, tax-based token issuance is on pause.
2. DeDust violated the agreements.
We received no heads-up, no migration period, no technical window for adjustment.
They simply made a decision and removed a live infrastructure layer that projects depended on.
3. A warning for other projects
If you are building a product on top of DeDust or interacting with the team in any way, consider the following:
— agreements are not honored;
— infrastructure can be changed without warning;
— your mechanics can be broken at any moment;
— the team’s stance is «we do what we want, and you deal with it however you can».

We consider such actions unacceptable for an infrastructure player in the TON ecosystem and ask Ton Foundation to pay attention to its partners, who have effectively enabled a mechanism allowing them to profit through unilateral changes to operating conditions for third-party projects.

Note that this is not the first such incident: previously DeDust stopped paying out trading fees to developers, and recently users faced losses of over 80,000 TON as a result of their decisions. This confirms that such situations are not isolated.