I propose,
to introduce two (2) VAT rates instead of several. I had already thought about this before the government's proposal to increase VAT by a few percentage points. At the same time, I suggest to the Government that it should introduce a more fundamental tax reform that will boost the momentum of the economy and build more on what we have rather than what we do not have. We have nothing to lose, and the bold are lucky.
There are some advantages to more rates, one of which is certainly a higher and more accurate tax take.  Another advantage is that it is easier to calculate taxes because the tax rates are round numbers (5, 10,20,30,50). The system is not perfect, of course, because you can't build Rome in two hours, but the base is just.
I give the tax rates (for a five-tier system, possible reduction to three):
1. A tax bracket aimed at social welfare and boosting/relieving the economy. Essential medicines (medicines for chronic patients, children, patients with special needs), emergency operations and medical services, basic foodstuffs (black bread [not dyed white, as the bakers cheat!!!], milk and dairy products, oil, eggs, vegetables, meat and meat products, salt, unrefined sugar, spices without preservatives) and necessities and essential services (water, waste, municipal energy from green sources - hydroelectricity, solar electricity, electricity from wind farms, excluding fuel oil and coal - both in retail sales) could be taxed at the lowest rate. Energy products for businesses and sole traders and their sales of intermediate products or services for resale could also be taxed at this rate. Publications in the fields of sport, culture, science and education should be taxed in the same way, with the exception of exemptions as already provided for in the current Article 26 of the VAT Act, which would exempt them from tax.
For energy products obtained from green sources, it would be appropriate to exempt suppliers from VAT in the first month of supply, thus symbolically repaying them for their efforts.
I would include essential utilities and goods (e.g. water [e.g. 1m3/month], waste, energy products up to a standard amount per person - this would encourage eco-management, and it would be appropriate to tax the excesses at the third rate). To this I would add various other services, such as services provided by disability businesses and charities. At the same time, I would add to this tax rate organic food, products that can be 100% recycled without major environmental impact (e.g. glass packaging as a stand-alone product), services that use 100% recycled products in their process and 100% clean energy (sun, water, wind).
The proposed tax rate at this level is 5%. In fact, this is a reduced rate compared to the current first rate and represents a boost for some industries instead of a cut.
 
2. This tax bracket is designed to ensure the sustainability of the service/good. This is a classic non-essential service or good, but still necessary for a comfortable life.  This includes foods that we eat out of habit and are not harmful in large quantities (e.g. white bread, rolls, whole milk, condiments with few preservatives, other foods that are harmful in principle, together with special dietary exceptions such as stomach patients who even need the old white bread), and prescription medicines, non-emergency but compulsory operations and other social services.  This includes above-average municipal services.  Products that can be recycled up to 90% (or services that qualify as such), in particular vehicles and electronic equipment, both first piece per owner (sensible to introduce a register of all types of equipment). For the sake of environmental vouchers, it might be sensible to include thermal power in this tier for companies and individuals.
The proposed tax rate in this tier is 10%, which is slightly higher than the current first tier by 1.5% and still sustainable for most. At the same time, with a 10% tax, you can easily count on it, and we have already had a 10% tax.
3. A middle rate or general VAT. The same rate as before, but fewer services and goods would be covered, with all food, services, goods and medicines not covered by the other groups. In principle, this would be all general services and necessities, except luxuries and social services.  All products that can be recycled up to 75% (or services that qualify as such). Fuels and energy from woody biomass and natural gas would also be included in this tier.
The proposed tax rate is 20%, as before. This rate is easy to calculate and I propose to keep it.
4. This tax rate is mainly aimed at the turnover of large luxury items such as luxury vehicles (more than 30kW/person or other and each subsequent vehicle ), luxury boats (sorry, I am not an expert here, but 7.5m in length seems to me to be appropriate for an amateur) and turnover of immovable property. This would also include all over-the-counter energy products (mainly ELKO, diesel, petrol) except subsistence ones (wood, wind, solar, hydro and thermal energy). But at the same time, this rate would already tax medium-luxury foods, e.g. fatty meats, refined sugar, plain rum and the like, as well as prescription cosmetic surgery (for example).
The proposed tax rate is 30%, for ease of calculation.
5. The last, highest rate of tax is mainly intended to be levied on small luxury goods sold over the counter (alcohol, tobacco, cigarettes, sugary drinks, "refreshment" drinks, luxury services, luxury goods (gold products)). Beauty operations at the request of the patient and transport at the patient's request, unjustified rescue operations (example) would also fall into this category. Fuel and fuel components for two-stroke engines would also be put into this rate.
The proposed rate of tax in the last group is 50%. This is also easy to calculate, and all rates are ideal for checking in the general ledger.
 
I think that these proposals would raise a lot more for the treasury than the Government's current proposal. And it would also give the economy a partial boost, which the Government is not doing very well, because it is implementing specific taxes rather than redistribution across tax brackets.  The system is, if I think about it, unique, and it hits the whole population. We could achieve a similar effect with three tax rates instead of five, but very careful thought is needed.
In 1996, there were no more and no less than 32 tax rates (thirty-two, I know, I was programming for accountants at the time), so we should not be ashamed of abolishing restrictive excise duties (fuel, cigarettes, alcohol) and instead gradually transforming them into a special single luxury VAT. This will lead to less interference by the state in market conditions and will raise the price for the state (which can, of course, change the VAT rate).