Principled, I never said that. Where did you get that from?
Principled wrote:
You’re really trying to tell us that when income is not reported and income tax is not paid on said unreported income, that it has no effect on tax revenues.
Here's my point, boiled down to a few sentences.
Prostitutes, drug dealers and other "underground economy" tax evaders always cheat on their taxes. Under the income tax system we have today, they cheat by not reporting their income and not paying tax on that. Under the FairTax, they won't report their taxable sales, and they won't collect and remit the taxes due on their sales. The FairTax won't collect any more revenue from the "underground economy" than the income tax because the "undergound economy" exists to evade taxation.
You are the one making absurd, untrue statements, such as, “So under the nrst, drug dealers and prostitutes etc WILL pay their full burden.”
When I challenge you to tell me why you believe that drug dealers and prostitutes will comply with Section 103(a) of the FairTax, instead of admitting that you're incorrect, you respond with personal attacks on me. I guess that means you have no answer.
If the FairTax were a better proposal, you wouldn't have to exaggerate the benefits and make untrue claims about it.
An individual’s full tax burden is collected from purchases under the nrst. Income and its reporting are irrelevant.
Only part of an individual’s tax burden is collected from purchases under the income tax. Hence [read slowly], individuals who do not report income and do not pay tax on income are paying less than their full share.
Duh.
If someone who now pays only part of his taxes begins paying his full amount, he’ll be paying more. You say otherwise. That’s just dumb.