Some debureaucratisation experts consider that dues for public services are dispensable if they concern most citizens anyway.

"Every public institution has its own billing point which nearly results in more costs than income!" diagnoses pensioned administration expert Conrad Liner and presents some handwritten calculations. "It is in on behalf of both citizens and state to introduce a flatrate for public services, at least for private households. This would be cheaper for both sides, only some accountants would have to be laid off..."

"A turning away from costs-by-cause principle benefits too many freeloaders!" warns Eleonore Hovmaster who finished her apprenticeship as tax inspector lately. "But there is another way to avoid needless administrative processes. Why don't administrations notify finance office of the dues which then settles them with the income tax? It couldn't be easier and more fair!"

"And what about privacy? Finance office shouldn't be informed about my trash or effluent dues!" pleads Ulric Button, a liberal leading a local government. "And there will always be people who are not interested in public services at all. No, we have to get rid of any lump sums and each service has to be paid based on exact costs!"

"The idea of a central due encashment is very appealing!" means Veronica Graveforcer, a start-up entrepreneur and owner of a collection agency. "But this doesn't have to happen by finance office or other public institutions. Such affairs could easily be done by private corporations which handle them unbeatable low priced!"

Which option is the best? I don't fully understand the task.