With each bar exam, the Philippines graduates a good number of topnotchers—faces of hope, all aglow with the radiance of fresh minds. But glance around us: does this radiance find its way to our streets, our courts, our barangays, our fractured systems? It’s as if we are reaping diamonds and dumping them into the sea.

We’ve never been short of minds in this nation. From remote public schools in the mountains to UP Diliman’s echoing lecture halls, we’ve raised thinkers, inventors, writers, analysts, and dreamers—individuals whose brilliance would have bloomed anywhere else in the world. But here, their ideas too often wilt, choked by the dry air of red tape, corruption, and a maddening obsession with hierarchy over substance. The sorry irony is that all our brightest and best end up queuing up at the POEA, diploma conveniently wedged between bags, bound for a country that will happily pay them what they are worth. It’s an unspoken brain drain, a gradual draining away of the nation’s intellectual blood.

What is genius when it cannot shatter walls? What is genius and vision, bounded by a system that stifles initiative except when it promotes individual interests of the mighty? Intelligence cannot displace a culture drenched in pakikisama, utang na loob, and tokenism. Such cultural anchors are fine within close, small community settings, but as a national culture, they devour systems, promote mediocrity to the highest level, and stifle reform. Our wisest tend to be backed into a corner, their thoughts diluted to appease bosses, elders, or the establishment. Blind loyalty usually triumphs in the fight between critical thinking and blind loyalty.

And so, our technologists labor overseas creating intelligent cities for the outside world, while on our ground, traffic weaves around potholes and half-constructed bridges. Our researchers spend their days studying global climate trends for Swedish schools, while our roads flood at the prospect of a raindrop. Our economists consult for foreign banks while our nation’s inflation nibbles dinner plates off regular families’ tables. The message rings clear but soft-whispered: it’s brilliance that’s being invited here, but as ornament, not leadership.

And finally, there is the dark truth of how we choose our leaders. Ivy League degrees, global recognition, and policy expertise come in a distant second to celebrity, name recognition, and slick campaign slogans. Is it worth having a country full of intelligent people if they are led by those who do not like it, or worse, are intimidated by it? We possess technocrats. intellectuals and experts aplenty, yet they are sitting on the sidelines politely and quietly applauding second-rate leaders who can only qualify based on birth or charm. It is not just disappointing—it is a violation of the promise of education itself.

Even in day-to-day life, the Filipino genius is helpless against institutional neglect. Those with Master’s degrees barely manage to eke out their livelihood on wages that cannot even feed a family. Rural health workers understand the science of dengue and malnutrition, but have no means or budgets to implement it. We salute brains but fail to give forums and frameworks for them to be really working in the interest of the greater good. The breakdown of trust in institutions is not because people are dumb—it is because people are intelligent enough to notice the rot and the pointlessness of fighting against it.

But maybe the more profound tragedy is how such genius becomes resigned. Filipinos are not stupid; we know what is occurring. And yet, so many brilliant minds opt out to achieve personal victory rather than repair public defeat. It’s survival. And who can blame them? But when the brightest minds no longer dream for the nation, the soul of the nation loses its shine, and we are left with brilliance for itself alone. A country without a shared purpose is a lost country, no matter how many diplomas it possesses.

Yet I think there is a way out—and not in producing more brilliant minds but in creating systems where brilliance can breathe, move, and lead. We must unshackle intelligence from the ivory tower and let it flow into city halls, classrooms, rural farms, and barangay health centers. Brilliance is not quantifiable in board examination marks and Latin honors but in its ability to agitate the stagnant, deconstruct the corrupt, and elevate the masses. That, in my opinion, is the only brilliance worth celebrating.

Determining the appropriate percentage of business income an entrepreneur should receive is a complex issue with no one-size-fits-all answer. The ideal percentage depends on several factors, including the business structure, stage of development, investment levels, risk tolerance, and the entrepreneur’s role and responsibilities. This article explores the key considerations in determining a fair and sustainable compensation strategy for entrepreneurs.

1. Business Structure and Legal Considerations: Setting the Foundation for Compensation
The legal structure of the business significantly impacts how income is distributed. Different structures have different implications for taxation, liability, and ownership:

– Sole Proprietorship: In a sole proprietorship, the entrepreneur receives all the profits but also bears all the liabilities. The entire income is considered personal income and taxed accordingly. The entrepreneur’s share is 100%, but this also means they bear 100% of the risk.

– Partnership: Partnership profits are distributed as stipulated in the partnership agreement. This agreement should clearly define each partner’s contribution, responsibilities, and share of profits. The percentage can vary widely depending on the agreement.

– Limited Liability Company (LLC): LLCs offer some liability protection while allowing flexibility in profit distribution. The operating agreement should specify how profits are allocated among members.

– Corporation (S Corp or C Corp): Corporations have a more complex structure, with profits distributed as salaries, dividends, or retained earnings. The entrepreneur’s share depends on their salary, ownership stake, and the corporation’s profitability. Tax implications are significant and require professional advice.

Legal Counsel: Seeking legal counsel is crucial to ensure the chosen business structure aligns with the entrepreneur’s goals and complies with all relevant regulations. The legal structure directly impacts how income is taxed and distributed.

2. Stage of Business Development: Balancing Risk and Reward

The stage of business development significantly influences the entrepreneur’s appropriate income percentage. Early-stage ventures often require significant investment with uncertain returns. As the business matures and becomes more profitable, the entrepreneur’s share might adjust:

– Seed Stage: In the seed stage, the entrepreneur might take a minimal salary, reinvesting most profits back into the business for growth. Their focus is on building the foundation and proving the business model. A small percentage of income, or even no salary, might be common.

– Startup Stage: During the startup phase, the entrepreneur might take a modest salary, prioritizing reinvestment while gradually increasing their share as revenue grows. The balance shifts towards a higher percentage as the business becomes more stable.

– Growth Stage: In the growth stage, the business is generating consistent revenue, and the entrepreneur’s compensation can increase significantly, reflecting their contribution and the reduced risk. A higher percentage of income becomes more feasible.

– Mature Stage: In a mature business, the entrepreneur’s compensation might be a combination of salary, bonuses, and a share of profits, reflecting their ongoing role and the business’s profitability. The percentage might stabilize or even decrease if the business is highly profitable and the entrepreneur’s role is less hands-on.

Financial Projections: Developing realistic financial projections is crucial for determining a sustainable compensation strategy. This helps balance the entrepreneur’s needs with the business’s financial health.

3. Investment Levels and Risk Tolerance: Considering External Funding and Equity
The level of investment, both personal and external, influences the entrepreneur’s share of income. Investors typically expect a return on their investment, which affects the entrepreneur’s ultimate share:

– Bootstrapped Businesses: In bootstrapped businesses (funded solely by the entrepreneur), the entrepreneur retains a larger share of profits. However, this also means bearing all the financial risk.

– Venture Capital-Backed Businesses: Venture capitalists typically receive equity in exchange for their investment. This reduces the entrepreneur’s ownership stake and consequently, their share of profits. Investment terms are subject to negotiation and differ greatly depending on the investment amount and the company’s development stage.

– Angel Investors: Similar to venture capitalists, angel investors receive equity in exchange for their investment, impacting the entrepreneur’s share of profits.

Equity vs. Debt: Understanding the difference between equity and debt financing is crucial. Equity financing dilutes ownership, while debt financing requires repayment. The entrepreneur’s share is directly affected by the type of financing secured.

4. Role and Responsibilities: Fair Compensation for Contribution

The entrepreneur’s role and responsibilities within the business should be considered when determining their share of income. A founder who is actively involved in daily operations might receive a larger share than a passive investor.

– Active vs. Passive Role: Entrepreneurs with active roles, managing day-to-day operations and strategic decisions, typically receive a larger share of income. Passive investors, who provide capital but are not actively involved in management, might receive a smaller share.

– Specialized Skills: Entrepreneurs with specialized skills or expertise that are crucial to the business’s success might negotiate a larger share of income.

– Market Value: The entrepreneur’s market value, based on their experience and skills, can also influence their compensation.

5. Regular Review and Adjustment: Adapting to Changing Circumstances

The entrepreneur’s share of income should not be static. It should be reviewed and adjusted periodically to reflect the business’s performance, the entrepreneur’s contributions, and changes in the market.

– Performance-Based Compensation: Incorporating performance-based bonuses or incentives can align the entrepreneur’s interests with the business’s success.

– Market Benchmarking: Comparing the entrepreneur’s compensation to industry benchmarks can help ensure fairness and competitiveness.

In conclusion, determining the appropriate percentage of business income for an entrepreneur is a multifaceted decision requiring careful consideration of various factors. A well-defined compensation strategy should be fair, sustainable, and aligned with the business’s goals and the entrepreneur’s contributions. Seeking professional advice from legal and financial experts is highly recommended to ensure a sound and legally compliant approach.
————–
If you have any questions or would like to share your thoughts on the column, feel free to send an email to jca.bblueprint@gmail.com. Looking forward to connecting with you!