Highly-paid stars have come under increasing public pressure to commit to a wage reduction after the coronavirus pandemic brought England's top flight to a halt until at least May.
Liverpool on Sunday (AEDT) joined Tottenham Hotspur, Newcastle United, Norwich City and Bournemouth in placing a number of non-playing staff on furlough. The scheme sees the United Kingdom government cover 80 per cent of an individual's wages up to the value of £2500 ($5100).
Health secretary Matt Hancock called on footballers to "play their part" and Premier League clubs agreed at a meeting on Saturday (AEDT) to approach them over a pay cut.
No agreement was reached with the PFA, which suggested it was not the right approach, mooting that services such as the National Health Service (NHS) could suffer a financial blow.
However, the players' union stated a "substantial contribution" will be made once talks have been concluded.
The PFA's statement read: "The players are mindful that as PAYE [pay as you earn] employees, the combined tax on their salaries is a significant contribution to funding essential public services, which are especially critical at this time.
"Taking a 30 per cent salary deduction will cost the Exchequer substantial sums. This would be detrimental to our NHS and other government-funded services.
"The proposed 30 per cent salary deduction over a 12-month period equates to over £500 million in wage reductions and a loss in tax contributions of more than £200 million to the government.
"What effect does this loss of earning to the government mean for the NHS? Was this considered in the Premier League proposal and did the health secretary, Matt Hancock, factor this in when asking players to take a salary cut?
"We welcomed the opportunity to discuss this with the Premier League today and we are happy to continue talks.
"It is our priority to finalise the precise details of our commitment as soon as possible. However, to achieve a collective position for all Premier League players - of which there are many different financial and contractual circumstances from club-to-club - will take a bit more time.
"The PFA Charity has also agreed to make a substantial contribution to a player-led initiative once the details are finalised.
"There should be no doubting the players and captains are committed to achieving this as soon as possible. They recognise their role in wider society and what they need to do, as a group, to help and support others."
The PFA also claimed the Premier League's decision to advance £125 million ($254.6. million) to EFL and National League clubs and donate £20 million ($40.7 million) to the NHS and other charitable causes was insufficient.
"£20 million is welcome, but we believe it could be far bigger," the statement read.
"The EFL money is an advance. Importantly, it will aid cashflow in the immediate, but football needs to find a way to increase funding to the EFL and non-league clubs in the long-term.
"Many clubs require an increase in funding just to survive. We believe in our football pyramid and again stress the need for solidarity between all clubs."
The statement added that players want to ensure their financial contributions support clubs, players and staff at all levels of the football pyramid and the NHS, whose workers it called "the real heroes".