The point the article was making is not that the boss has claims to the $20K, it is the boss would have to keep the $20K to reduce prices like the fair taxers claim. The article points out the deception the fair taxers use in promoting their tax plan.
Again, this is bogus. The boss does not need to get his price reduction out of the hide of the employee. He gets it out of cheaper materials, physical plant, energy, transportaion, etc.
As I pointed out, the Employer's share of fica is the only part of the payroll process that would NOT be passed on to the employee. That part (its fairly small) will go toward reduction in costs.
Add to that employers share of fica, all the other taxes corporations pay and you have (supprise!) 23% of the cost of a finished product, whether its a sewing needle or a new car.
The writer thinks hes found a flaw, but it is mostly just a flaw in his reasoning.
Go look at the list of economics professors that support Fair Tax. The least among them has better credentials than this smug writer.
There's nothing of substance in the article that backs up such a claim - not at all. Only the rant by the reporter who obviously detests Boortz and those who like him ... one can tell that by the little descriptive vignettes the reporter throws in to demean the people involved (who obviously are pro-Boortz and pro-FairTax).
Perhaps he'd be more accurate to use the term "polemic" when describing William Gale since that's what most of Gale's one-liners really are.