Join the new world

First Published Day 2984
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/mof-mid-term-report-and-faq-2578646/1/20

G'Day eAustralia,

Welcome to the just-past-the-middle of the cabinet term. It's been an eventful one politically, full of lively debate, and ups and downs, but financially speaking it has been all bull in the markets. Bull meaning they are doing well, not referring to a more common Aussie expression.



State of the Treasury

In the first 16 days we collected $53,420 in taxes with an average of $3,339, up $529 on last term's average of $2,810. We're looking on track to collect $100K in taxes this term. $20K up on last term.

We collected around $49K in donations. Most notably, $20K from Jack Trout, $10K from gbr_blue, and $10K from Montenegro to fund Mutual Protection Pacts, and around $9K in donations from medals won during the democratic revolution.

We recieved $52,166 and 40 Gold in rent payments for 8 organisations. This includes $42K from the Bank of Rusty D which paid 12 months in advance. Next term the plan is to move to cash payments of $3,500 and to phase out gold payments as the Treasury has little use for it.

We have signed or renewed 9 Mutual Protection Pacts for a total cost of $90K

By close of business on the 21/01/2016, Day 2984, The Treasury stood at AU$124,866 and 136 Gold. This is $65,059 and 40 Gold up on the end of last term.



FAQs

There have been a few questions about the finances and economy, I will try to deal with those not answered in the report as best I can.

Who will pay for self-coup?

This is a big question, and one best left to the senate, although some citizens have offered to help fund it, so the Treasury wouldn't necessarily be out of pocket. At present there are no official plans for a return to dictatorship, and the survey conducted by Ilene, which is still active, showed at last count, despite the low number of respondents, a majority in favour of continuing with full democracy.

How many Mutual Protection Pacts can we afford?

There is no fixed number, it depends on tax revenue and other expenses, and often eAustralian citizens or the initiating country will offer to pay for them. While there is obviously a limit to how many we can afford, this term, with the help of some generous donations, we have easily been able to afford all the pacts which passed a senate vote.

When will the Weapons Industry Roundtable start?

Today. I had planned it earlier, but there was an unexpected spike in lower cost supply and I wanted to see how that played out first.

Why I can't find reasonable price for Food Raw Materials in our local market? I bought them from abroad regardless that our food bonus is 60%.

This is an issue I plan on investigating, as well as the food prices which have been trending above $0.10 for Q1 recently. Once the Weapons Industry Roundtable is complete. I will initiate one for the Food Industry. In the meantime I am interested to hear from consumers and producers about this, which will help me in preparing a list of discussion topics.

Comments carried over from original publication:

Jack Trout
Thank you, gudz- excellent information, well presented.

Rusty D
Just a couple of points and while I know the normal people will slag me off for this, but I do want to raise it:

1) Comparing to last terms taxes - the start of last term we were still in the region rental with Chile, so to see the taxes back, we would need to take into account what was collect by them when the bill was paid. The website I sent you a while back would show these figures. But all in all from my record keeping we have an avg of +3k daily income this term.

2) MPP - Yes we can afford as many as the cash flow allows, be it private or gov funded. HOWEVER, all MPPs increase our AS budget, both with cc and energy. cc is no problem, but the energy tends to be the harder, more expensive one. IMO some MPP's can be let go and signed when that country is need of help or after a AS law is proposed. This will allow Australia to strike out further away to assist allies or to our own benefit.

gudzwabofer
I already accounted for all the extra eChile payments in the start of term report. I only counted the tax collected by eChile as tax, everything else paid by eChile as tax reimbursement I counted as a bonus, that way the numbers lined up better for comparing terms on the base rate.

Even without the bonus, just counting the tax collected by eAustralia and eChile in eAus territories, the days that eChile held territories still counted as the higher revenue ones due to eChile's larger economy. Only 7 other days last term were above 3k.

We don't have any Airstrikes planned as yet. There was one proposed which didn't go through. I guess if there's another one we'll cross that bridge, but if it's an ally requesting it they may well pay for a large percentage of the costs. I'd put the food cost at about 250k at present so yeah not cheap.

AS aside, and just based on taxation and org rent I suppose 12 is a sustainable number of MPPs, not withstanding the effects of any training wars, but there doesn't seem to be a shortage of people willing to donate for any above that.

Rusty D
The thing I was trying to explain with the MPPs, is Yes 12 is sustainable, but that would result in a higher AS cost (depending on our alliance partners). If you look at the formula to work out AS:

Energy:
Energy units required = (country citizenship population + all allies population) * 250

Cost:
Law fee = (1.000.000 currency + 100.000 currency for each region owned that is not original) * (1 + (25 * number of distinct food resources owned)/100))/15

You would see that 12 MPPs could greatly increase the costs of an AS. Looking at our MPP stack as it is, I can see 4 IMO that could easily be dropped with out an ill effect to our friendships or safety of either nation, which would in turn reduce the cost in energy of any AS (plus other savings made). these 4, can always be signed if either nation requires unplanned assistance or after either one has declared an AS.

So yes it is correct to say we can afford one with every pro Australia country, but the smarter financial and military way would be to slim line and look deeper at each MPP we have. This would increase tax profit, reduce the cost of AS and make Australia in a better position to assist allies where needed. Even for the so called 1 AS proposed, as many offered did not make it to be discussed in congress (democracy at work eh?).

gudzwabofer
The necessity of each MPP is something you would need to discuss with the MoD or MoFA. And something which is discussed by those willing to discuss them in the Senate at the time of their proposal. There are I'm sure other reasons for maintaining the stack besides immediate necessity. My job is merely to see if we can afford to do what is proposed. It is up to the MoD and MoFA to decide between them what to advise cabinet and the senate what they think we should do diplomatically and what they think we should do strategically. And to prioritise those things based on the available budget. At any rate even with 4 less MPPs I'm not sure how much cheaper an AS would be, it could still be beyond our budget do do more than one every few months, even if the MPPs put on hold are the 4 most populous allies, and it would depend how they would feel about being put on hold. Again all things you'd need to take up with the relevant ministers.

Also, I've only noticed one airstrike being discussed in either the cabinet or the senate, and there were other options under discussion for assisting that ally also. I'm sure other allies may well like us to airstrike their enemy, but whether they are willing to foot the bill, and what ramifications may come our way after such an overt action, as opposed to sending troops as part of a combined effort are things that the MoD would need to weigh up.

I'm all for discussing these things at length in the Senate, but there have been problems with leaks, which is something best avoided with battle plans. That is a whole other issue in itself.

Lord TJ
Thanks Minister for the very detailed report. Great to see them.

J Seemore
Great to see transperency on the reporting these days. It has been a very long time since we have seen something like this.