Trump-linked WLFI floats proposal that would stretch investor token unlocks over four years

On April 15, World Liberty Financial (WLFI), the Trump-family-associated crypto project that has recently drawn heavy public scrutiny, posted a governance proposal outlining how locked allocations for "early supporters, founders, team members, and partners" would be released. The plan immediately reignited debate around WLFI. WLFI supply and prior sales WLFI has a fixed total supply of 100 billion tokens and previously ran two public presales. The first began in October 2024 at $0.015 per token, offering 20 billion WLFI (20% of supply). Demand was initially muted amid market FUD, but momentum improved after the launch of Trump's token. The tranche ultimately sold out on Jan. 20, 2025, raising $300 million. WLFI then opened a second public presale priced at $0.05 per token, with 5 billion tokens (5% of supply). That round sold out on March 14, 2025, raising $250 million. Separately, WLFI's tokenomics indicate 8.893 billion WLFI (8.893% of supply) were sold to strategic and institutional participants at $0.10 per token. In total, WLFI presold 33.893 billion tokens, equal to 33.893% of total supply. Launch and initial unlock WLFI officially launched on Sept. 1, 2025. At launch, presale users received an initial unlock: participants who joined both public presale rounds could unlock 20% after signing the token unlock agreement and completing activation, while the remaining 80% would be subject to future governance decisions. Institutional allocations remained locked. After launch, WLFI was widely promoted and its onchain price briefly topped $0.45, while some smaller exchanges saw short-lived spikes above $1. Over subsequent months, the token trended down from above $0.20 and is trading around $0.08 at the time of writing. For first-round buyers at $0.015, even with only 20% unlocked, many could have recouped principal or posted gains if they sold during the past few months. For second-round buyers at $0.05, most are still below cost unless they sold into the early listing surge. As prices softened, presale participants became increasingly focused on when the remaining 80% might be released. Proposal: 4-year unlock for presale users, 5-year schedule for insiders Under the newly posted forum proposal, WLFI sets out a long-dated vesting framework for remaining locked tokens held by early supporters (presale users), founders, team members, advisors, and partners. For presale users, the proposal cites 17,043,666,558 WLFI currently involved (noting the figure may change because some users have not claimed tokens). All locked tokens would be subject to a two-year cliff (lockup), followed by a two-year linear vesting period, taking four years in total to fully unlock. For founders, team members, advisors, and partners, the proposal covers 45,238,585,647 WLFI. It calls for 10% of the locked amount—4,523,858,565 WLFI—to be permanently burned and removed from total supply. The remaining 90%, or 40,714,727,082 WLFI, would face a two-year lockup followed by three years of linear vesting, implying a five-year path to full unlock. The proposal also states that if it passes, tokens held by participants who do not explicitly accept the allocation plan would remain locked indefinitely. The post further drew criticism over alleged comment moderation on WLFI's governance forum, where many replies appeared highly repetitive and potentially bot-generated. Why propose a burn? Market observers have also debated why the WLFI team would burn 10% of insider allocations. One interpretation is that the team is demonstrating commitment and making a real sacrifice. Another view is that the burn is largely symbolic, aimed at easing community pushback, especially given that tokens subject to multi-year lockups may have uncertain near-term value. Some critics argue the broader goal is to keep as much supply locked as possible because the current distribution structure best serves the team's interests, including through allocations that may not be obvious from public labels. The author characterizes this as personal speculation.