You can "state" it 'till you're blue in the face, s-test. that won't make it true.
You seem to misunderstand how the repeal process works (and I don't just mean the number of congressional votes and number of states votes). Bills to repeal constitutional amendments have very specific requirements and trying to stick a conditional clause into the FairTax bill would not meet those requirements. The wording must be very complete and specific and the same to all states. Having the separate repeal bill is the proper way to do it.
If you think you could possibly repeal the income tax amendment while the income tax is the tax law of the land, then you are more naiive than I would have thought. No congressman is dumb enough to try that.
If you think you could possibly repeal the income tax amendment while the income tax is the tax law of the land, then you are more naiive than I would have thought. No congressman is dumb enough to try that.
Actually 92+ years of evidence with nearly continuous resolutions introduced to repeal said 16th amendment with no action yet is rather overwhealming that Congress has zero reason to repeal 16th amendment as long an income tax is on the books.
Remove all taxes on income from the federal statutes, obsolete the income tax by providing a viable and constitutional alternative based on consumption purchases only, and Congress will have every political encouragement in the world to grab at the freebee of killing the income tax amendment for political gain.
Guaranteed any political party with the gumption to push the repeal of the 16th amendment while the iron is hot and in total view of the electorate is guaranteed the control of Congress and the Whitehouse for decades to come. But it ain't in the cards as long as the income tax is the source of revenue for federal government. A century of political wrangling under those terms has made that absolutely clear.