It’s the name. Like so many things in economics a name is used for effect or response rather than understanding. The “FairTax” is nothing more than a tax on consumption. In other words this is a sales tax. So the debate is not one of fair or not fair, it’s about allocation and distribution. A tax on consumption will be sure to alter consumer spending behavior thereby changing the allocation and distribution of goods and services. I’m making an assumption that a final proposal will incorporate some taxation on services currently not taxed. There is nothing fair about the “FairTax” unless we make it so!

Any reasonable person can find many faults with the current tax system. There’s the paperwork, enforcement, the IRS, loopholes for some, and on and on. So, why not try the darn thing? It takes years for most of us to except and incorporate the current tax system into our lives as working adults. We still don’t understand it just from the language we speak. I hear people speak of not paying any taxes, because they happen to be getting a refund. We know that a refund is simply a return of mandated interest free loan (i.e. the difference between what you owed and what you paid) to the government.

To make a long story short it’s all in the math. The sales tax will be a fair tax if it does not increase the amount of taxes most would be paying under the prevailing system given little change in patterns of consumption.

This is what I would do. I would start by determining typical consumption patterns for current IRS income brackets. Then we can use the Consumer Price Index and some math to play with various tax rates. When we come up with numbers that have us revenue neutral plus 5% (i.e. to be used exclusively to pay down the countries debt) we present this to the voters as a constitutional amendment to abolish the IRS forever.