Those taxes that the employee will now be pocketing were the majority of the 'embedded taxes' according to the man who did the study. But of course you know more than him.
It's just not possible, if you simply think this through. The majority of the savings would be from the corporate taxes, which the companies would no longer pay. And then there would be lower costs for supplies and services that each company depends on as well. A maximum savings from payroll would be roughly 7.5% of the part of the companies budget that pays salaries. This would NOT be where the majority of the savings would come from. There would also be lower compliance costs as well, both in manpower (a former client of mine once told me that he had to hire an additional person in payroll for every 120 employees, just to handle the "paperwork" for taxes. The company that I work for now gave up a few years ago, and they have ADP handle all their payroll and tax accounting) and time.
Of course, you accuse the supporters of the Fair Tax of using doctored numbers, but is it possible that this person is using doctored numbers as well, but in opposition to the Fair Tax?
Mark
Of course, you accuse the supporters of the Fair Tax of using doctored numbers, but is it possible that this person is using doctored numbers as well, but in opposition to the Fair Tax?"This person" was hired by the authors of the Fairtax to do the study.
At one time "this person's" name was used in every other post by Fairtaxers as THEE authority on embedded taxes for the Fairtax. It wasn't untill recently that "this person" became dirt when it was exposed that AFFT NOT "this person" was is lying about 22% embedded taxes and 100% paychecks all along...