His comment on "first dollar" is wildly deceptive as well. An income tax never applies to all 'revenue' but only to 'net income'.
He entirely skips over the difficulty of defining 'income' as revenue minus all VALID business expenses. This is the root of the IRS' most intrusive activities for businesses. He claims his plan would save the $250B in compliance costs, just as removing all taxes from business vis-a-vis the FairTax would. As though there are no compliance costs in satisfying the IRS that all your expenses -- and hence your net income reported -- are valid.
He entirely skips over the difficulty of defining 'income' as revenue minus all VALID business expenses.
Bingo!!!
Precisely the problem of the Flat Tax model and why it is not the answer in addressing the root problem of the income tax, exponentially growing complexity.
An interesting insight from the viewpoint a tax preparer/consultant as regards the Armey/Forbes/Hall/Rebushka Flat Tax.
Seems the devil is always in the details:
Flat Tax as Seen by a Tax Preparer
by Vern HovenNote: This article was first published as a Special Report by Tax Analysts Tax Notes, Volume 68, No. 6, pp 747-754. The publisher has granted permission for this article to be reprinted with attribution.