- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 27,401
- Reaction score
- 6,599
- Country

except I didn't. and all the deflective attacks don't change the fact you haven't scrutinised your sources... again.I have to say that you are probably the slipperiest person I have ever had the misfortune to debate with.
You just lie continuously, and then post masses of irrelevant nonsense to try to deflect from your own misunderstanding. We don't need to read an explanation of the entire US tax system.
Remember, you are the person who spent more than a hundred pages arguing over the meaning of the word 'approved' to try to cover up that you had misunderstood the most basic part of the abortion rules in the UK. I think you have a real mental problem.
We are left with the obvious fact that:
1 - no employer is going to on-book illegals and risk hefty fines. Thats without all the reputation damage caused by having poor CSR.
2 - no illegal is going to register and make deportation more likely
3 - any source that references itself, as the source and the reference makes zero reference to the subject is obviously focused on SEO and should be distrusted.
4 - estimating illegal immigrant contribution by counting all the non-citizen taxes is beyond nonsense.
Now I will accept that there is likely to be a number of illegals using stolen records to pay in and be on-book. But discussing how "in theory" illegals can pay income tax doesn't address the obvious issues in point 1 and 2.