Specific numerical values will be established by the government in each specific state

What will be, if the cost price of the goods will be not $100 (I remind, what thus profitability will be 10 %), and, say, $200?

Besides, we establish MFS = 10 % from proceeds. (For convenience of understanding, I define the cumulative tax, i.e. the TNC, 10 % equal also from proceeds. We shall assume, that the tax is defined such by. But, still time I shall repeat, that my offer to a question of the taxation has no attitude).

So, before you table 4.

The table 4.

And what there will be, if the price of the goods all the same $200, but TFNC = $10, and, shall repeat, by the law is established, that TNC =10 % from proceeds and MFS =10 % from proceeds? (Table 5)

The table 5.

By the way, profitability at the price $200 and TFNC =$70, will be 45 %, and at the price $200 and TFNC = $10 accordingly 75 %.

It has turned out, that at profitability in 10 %, MFS and PO are equal, (if by the law it is established, that MFS is 10 % from proceeds), and, at profitability in 45 %, MFS to PO corresponds as 2 to 9 (1 to 4,5); at profitability of 75 %, MFS to PO corresponds as 2 to 15 (1 to 7,5).

Whether it is possible to lift the salary to hired workers up to the same level what was in the first version of my offer i.e. when GPAMC shared fifty-fifty between PO and MFS?

Certainly it is possible.

For this purpose the government should define profitability of the company, and in case of profitability = 45 %, the mandatory percent of MFS from proceeds will be established at a rate of 27,5 % from proceeds (table 6), i.e. 10 % + 45 % = 55 %: 2 =27,5 % (or in face value: $20 + $90 = $110: 2 = $55).

The table 6.

At profitability = 75 % (table 7), mandatory percent of MFS from proceeds is 10 % + 75 % = 85 %: 2 = 42,5 %, (or in face value: $20 + $150 = $170: 2 = $85).

The table 7.

Complexity of this (second) version that the government needs to define profitability of the company, and it often enough and in steps can change. (but for this purpose also there are revenue serviceses of the government. The possibility of frauds with TFNC is not excluded also.

So, at increase of profitability, the percentage size of MFS from proceeds raises also, at reduction – decreases.

There is also a third version of my offer (E.O.1)

Its essence that the SPECIAL NEW TAX (SNT) which are collected by a revenue services of the government is entered, and then transform from SNT to mandatory fund salaries (MFS), and further MFS (table 8) shares between all workers fifty-fifty.

Table 8.

All is very simple.

The size of SNT is defined as follows. GPAMC shares on two parts: the first- PO, the second- SNT which is transformed in to MFS. (This is the first version).

Or SNT is defined as mandatory percentage size from proceeds (This is the second version).

Difference of the third version from the first and the second that MFS is withdrawn from profit of the company as the tax – the special new tax (SNT), and then already a revenue services transform SNT to the mandatory fund salaries (MFS).

What else dangers and complexities can arise at practical use of my offer in economic manufacture, in general in an economic life of the state? Their four. Here their brief transfers.

1. «Storehouses and terminations of the employment contracts».

2. «Fictitious or extra intermediaries».

3. «The internal prices».

4. «Fictitious workers».

Now in greater detail.