If the "FairTax" would abolish the IRS, then who is going to calculate and distribute its "prebate" provision?

Since the "FairTax" exempts some nebulous entity called "tuition," who other than the IRS is going to promulgate rules and regulations deciding what is and is not "tuition"?

Since the "FairTax" considers mortgage interest above the risk-free rate to be a "service" subject to the tax, who other than the IRS is going to determine exactly what that risk-free rate is over what periods and how it is to be applied?

Since the "FairTax" applies to sales of new homes but not to existing homes, who other than the IRS is going to set the rules for deciding what does and does constitute "new" or "existing"?

I could go on, but you get the idea.

Maybe Vic Fleischer can educate us, but I recall discussions about consumption versus income tax going back thirty years to the days of Wayne Barnett at Stanford.

My understanding is that consumption tax is not necessarily more or less "progressive" than income tax (as opposed to a sales tax). Consumption tax levies on that part of your income that you consume, as opposed to that part of your income that you save or invest. What I recall about its benefit (from tax class) was that it pretty much eliminates all of the issues around tax deferral, because ANYTHING you save (versus, presently, your IRA or 401(k) plan) is tax-deferred. So unlike a sales tax which, as a practical matter, cannot have graduated rates, nothing stops a consumption tax from doing so.

That may or may not be what Huckabee is proposing - I don't listen to him unless I'm stuck in an elevator with one of those "Captivate" TV networks inside. (Ugh - would McCain really add him to the ticket as Veep?)

I could never take huckabee seriously after learning of his "Fairtax" fixation.

Good comments by Kip and Jeff.

Here's the bottom line. We could do away with the income tax by enacting a national sales tax. Simply reprogram the cash registers across the nation that already impose a state sales tax on purchases (44 of 50 states do this, based on the most recent account I've read), so as to layer on a federal sales tax. Very cheap to implement. We won't need an IRS to interpret and enforce the national sales tax. Rather, we will only need a few officials to go inspect cash registers from time to time, much as officials now inspect gas pumps to make certain we aren't paying for a gallon, but pumping only 9/10 of it into the tank.

But, say the critics, what of progressivity? Thus the FairTax, with its "prebates" and other features that aim to treat the less fortunate among us "fairly," falls victim to administrative complexity. If enacted, it would not do away with the IRS or another agency of similar function.

We should have a tax system that raises revenue at the lowest cost. A national sales tax would do that. Congress can then appropriate funds to help the less fortunate among us. Oops. That may be the problem. Direct appropriations that redistribute wealth are difficult to hide from the electorate, unlike the many wealth redistribution provisions buried within the Internal Revenue Code in its current vast state.