Thanks. Glad you are enjoying it.
FairTax does not require a constitutional amendment to implement.
The politicos deem the pre-bate necessary so as to minimize the class warfare argument that the FairTax is regressive and will hurt “the poor.”
I despise the class warfare argument that LIEberal scoundrel politicians have used during my entire lifetime (72 years) to ensure they stay in power.
I really had hoped that the CW argument would have been scrapped long ago, but instead, it has gained momentum.
FairTax takes a large slice out of that argument by “leveling the playing field.”
So, the politicos reckon that by rendering the basic necessities of life tax-FRee for all families, irrespective of size, the FairTax has a better chance of passing.
And, once people are educated to the purpose of the pre-bate, resistance moderates.
“... FairTax does not require a constitutional amendment ...”
-
If a national sales tax was going to REPLACE the income tax,
a constitutional amendment would be needed, lest we end up being subject to both.
A flat tax on income, however, could be done by congress, if they had the requisite testicles.
In my thinking...
The advantage of a flat tax is that congress could do it;
and the disadvantage is that the IRS would survive.
The advantage of a national sales tax is that the IRS would vanish;
and the disadvantage is that a constitutional amendment would be required.