As a consequence of a larger base reaching a greater proportion of the population,A larger base does NOT mean it is reaching a greater proportion of the population. That's silly. It just means the base is larger. Actually income is a larger base than consumption (you guys like to compare all consumption to taxable income). If you wanted the largest base you would tax ALL income with no deductions. This wouldn't mean that it was reaching a greater proportion of the population though.
A larger base does NOT mean it is reaching a greater proportion of the population. That's silly. It just means the base is larger.
In the case of going from a narrow income/payroll tax system to a broad retail sales tax system it certainly does.
Actually income is a larger base than consumption (you guys like to compare all consumption to taxable income).
Lets see, the current system taxes "taxable income" (the system being replaced by a retail sales tax system,) but all consumption is not comparable to total income of that broader base you are talking about.
All consumption my friend encompasses a much broader proportion of the population than the mere "taxable income" achievable in the current tax system with it high non-compliance rates and broad illegal trade and underground cash economy.
Yep once again you try for your Strawman and narrow statement. Sorry no go.
In fact the FairTax WILL reach more people - many more - than the present income tax since those in the illegal economy will now be paying "full boat" taxes after many years of leeching off of income tax payers.