I essentially speak nothing about the CORRUPTION net cost, for in the normal state those should not be at all)

Critical area of the first version in the following.

The probability of is high that the capitalist-owner will try to reduce fictitiously GPAMC in the face of appropriating structures which will track mandatory performance of the state law on a mandatory minimum level of the salary (revenue serviceses, etc.), and to show in the reporting,

that a technologically-financial net cost (TFNC) significantly above. The capitalist will buy from itself (i.e. at other companies which goods and services also belong to it) under the overestimated prices as well as to pay to itself credits, and besides, it there will be fictitious credits and fictitious payments.

But special tax and to it similar services, I think, in a condition will cope with it, in fact it is their direct duty.

However, in my offer there are also other versions of definition and charge of the minimal salary.

The second version consists that the minimal salary is established not through definition of profit of the company (more precisely GPAMC), but through an establishment of the fixed percentage size of proceeds defined from the sum for the sold goods.

So, the former goods. A cost price = $100, TFNC = $70 = 70 % from proceeds.

TNC = $10 =10 % from proceeds. GPAMC = $20 = 20 % from proceeds. (Table 2).

The table 2.

But, in this (second) version, the mandatory fund salaries (MFS) is defined section not by on GPAMC two parts, but, by definition of MFS from proceeds for the goods.

The table 3.

In table 3 the size of MFS = 10 % from proceeds. It means, that each worker will receive 5 % from proceeds and accordingly $5. The owner will receive $10 = 10 % from proceeds. In this case profitability of the company is equal 10 %. Thus, it is one more way of definition of the size of MFS – mandatory percentage size from proceeds.