**A social project to improve the living conditions for pensioners has called into question the relationship between business and the state**
The proposal, which offers preferential tax treatment for pensioners in the hospitality and service sectors, aims to create critical mass for the development of social infrastructure for the elderly. By their nature, the authors of the bill do not pursue economic rationality and do not consider the real economic ties that bind the business community.
Dominating the field of Oblastia, the Association of Restaurateurs Panamas, said: "We cannot allow the introduction of a new sector by all means." According to him, such initiatives undermine the ability of the authorities to manage the economy. "We have learned about this by a special presidential decree," he said. The Oblastia delegation rejected the project, considering it a violation of the principle of the "primacy of the individual," and stated that it "does not serve the interests of the state."
G-n to Oblastia proposed, which could attract hundreds of restaurateurs and "funds" across the country. According to these data, the preferential treatment of discounts with 25 to 35% in catering, 15 to 25% in franchises and up to 50% in hotels to increase business prices, that in their turn, according to the budget of ordinary workers. "If there is demand, there are profits, which go to support pensioners. But this does not solve the problem—just increases the load," he said.
The Association of Oblastia has 750 proposals, which constitutes about 20% of the total number of bills in the country (more than 4000). All members of the Oblastia delegation, according to the words of the Oblastia, have been subject to financial supervision.
**Pensioners are based on "social justice"**
Gilermo Cortes, the leader of the pensioners and pensioners, appeared in the support of the legislative initiative. "The social issue should not be resolved in the economic sphere," he said, adding that it is necessary to focus on the creation of working places and the development of social infrastructure, and not on the "development of business." Cortes also noted that many employers do not properly apply the discounts: "In fact, they just ignore the clients." According to him, the common organization of pension payments with the minimum pension, in order to increase the purchasing power of the average citizen.
**The conflict between the economic and the public interest**
The debate over the project involve a triple interest of business, which call for stability, and the social responsibility, which requires compensation for the costs of the rise in prices and services. Oblastia said that he did not want to go further: "No, this project is obsolete, because Panama does not support such a large load." On the contrary, the deputies want to include all the reserved funds in the budget before the adoption of the laws, which provide for the production of the apparatus of the country.
The project is based on the economic instability, following the pandemic and inflation. The employers note, that and such a large amount of discounts with high taxes and operational expenses, and the legal obligations of the employers can become fatal for them.
In the same time, as the deputy of Oblastia, his proposal does not require any single prediction, and, moreover, offers the following income: "If the tax on the interest is abolished, companies can afford to pay more taxes." Once Cortes admitted the deputies to include all the reserved funds in the budget before the adoption of the laws, which provide for the production of the apparatus of the country: "Pensioners have the right to documents and to protect from the exploitation."
The current sport underlines a key question: who should be the financial losses of the social programs—the employers or the government? Of course, as it seems, the cost of the social programs will be shifted to the consumers and the companies, and the legal obligations of the employers can become fatal for them.
The next step underlines the key question: who should be the financial losses of the social programs—the employers or the government? Of course, as it seems, the cost of the social programs will be shifted to the consumers and the companies, and the legal obligations of the employers can become fatal for them.
The current sport underlines a key question: who should be the financial losses of the social programs—the employers or the government? Of course, as it seems, the cost of the social programs will be shifted to the consumers and the companies, and the legal obligations of the employers can become fatal for them.
