# Raise fees of crvUSD pools to 2 bps

**URL:** <http://gov.curve.finance/t/raise-fees-of-crvusd-pools-to-2-bps/9569>\
**Category:** Proposals\
**Created:** [August 25, 2023, 9:28pm UTC](http://gov.curve.finance/t/raise-fees-of-crvusd-pools-to-2-bps/9569 "2023-08-25T21:28:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![michwill](http://gov.curve.finance/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/8e8cbc/32.png) [@michwill](http://gov.curve.finance/u/michwill)\
**Post date:** [August 25, 2023, 9:28pm UTC](http://gov.curve.finance/t/raise-fees-of-crvusd-pools-to-2-bps/9569/1 "2023-08-25T21:28:05Z")

</div>

Currently, core crvUSD pools have 1 bps fee. Most of trading volume in there comes from soft liquidations in LLAMMA and swaps after borrows / before repayments.

I propose to see what raising the fees to 2 bps does there. It seems safe to do because LLAMMA internal fee is as much as 60bps, so +1 bps vs +2 bps for arbitrage traders is almost no difference.

Proposing to initially start with USDC/crvUSD pool to see what happens

**For** :

- Higher fee means more revenues from swap volume to the DAO if volume is not going to go down much anyway
- Higher fee means that price oracles (EMA) are more expensive to manipulate

**Against** :

- Swaps like USDC-\>crvUSD-\>USDT will be less feasible for traders
- crvUSD peg could be not as tight when PegKeeper pool fees are higher