And they advertise it as being even more progressive than our current system. So perhaps those who have been able so rise above the hand-to-mouth, government dependent, S/S crowd will be shouldering 100% of the tax burden. Good plan, eh? Destroy productivity and make everyone a pauper.
They also advertise it is better for everyone except those that work illegally now. Using their calculations the average middle income taxpayer would see his tax burden more than cut in half, and this is the middle income guy. And they don't see that as a red flag that there is something terribly wrong with their assumptions.
The main problem with their math is that they are assuming the 29.87% sales tax is revenue neutral. Since government has to pay the tax on its salaries, benefits and all non-education purchases, the revenue generated is not purchasing power neutral. This alone brings the sales tax rate up to 40%+ when expressed as a normal sales tax.
When you then take into account the reaction of the buying public to a 40%+ sales tax, the taxable base is likely to contract, in a number of ways: people buy used, people fix what they have, people just do without, people buy on black market, people barter, people buy through their business exemptions,...
Just a 15% drop in the taxable base due to the above would have the Fair Tax rate to 50% when expressed as a normal sales tax. Buy a $100 item, pay $150.
Look at the 8% price drop that I and others have estimated that could be possible by eliminating the employer half of FICA, and corporate tax on profits, and compliance costs--that 8% price drop if realized would contract the taxable base by making the same # of units sold cost up to 8% less.
"Destroy productivity and make everyone a pauper."
Quite the contrary - nor are here any real economic studies that back up your overheated rhetoric. There are, however, a number of them to show just the opposite - more benefit to the taxpayer and greatly increased economic activity.