I'm not qualified to answer that; but as a layman I share your concern. From lay reading it seems that the large organisations were hoping that situations like

I'm not qualified to answer that; but as a layman I share your concern. From lay reading it seems that the large organisations were hoping that situations like this could be arrested at source or in the early stages. To double down on my earlier comment; the inefficiencies the disease cause are not strictly the testing etc. Look at the regular flu [1] [2] it has been "measured" as costing economies some pretty significant sums every year ($87bn USA, £1.35bn UK, different standards used); of course this could be said to pale against the size of these leading economies [3] landing at less than 1%. An annual flu tax is certianly not ideal. Additional diseases will have different "tax rates", and I have no idea to the way in which they will interact. You have to bear in mind that a tax rate is a form of inhibitive cost, and the burden of disease could be holding other economies back. [1] https://www.cdcfoundation.org/pr/flu-costs-United-States-87-billion-annually https://www.cdcfoundation.org/pr/flu-costs-United-States-87-... [2] https://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/article-details/flu-costs-the-british-economy-1-35-billion https://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/article-details/flu-costs-the-b... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...