> How could I have been clearer?
You could say what about a [p]rebate can't be done without a VAT.
> A [p]rebate pays "the tax on that [basic health and dignity]
> level of consumption to every household in the country" *before*
> (that's the meaning of "pre") the purchases are made.
I agree: it's a bold move, but you can prebate any tax you want. And I do mean bold: not even Europe rebates the VAT; and even though you get a lot of services for it, it's still widely seen as regressive there. Plus VAT is open to all kinds of simple fraud.
In practice (got any examples of successful prebates for ~160M taxpayers?), you'd more likely see a rebate at the back-end, and even then: who wants the IRS to take in a dollar just to give it back? The government has never been good at using tax revenue to redistribute at the low end.
What have you got against a (more) fairly implemented, progressive income tax?
/jordan