Addressing the hard questions head-on.
"Won't companies just game the system?" The outcome-based structure prevents this. Base credits don't cover provider costs. Profit only comes from verified outcomes. Additionally: severe fraud penalties, fiduciary duty, public transparency, individual assignment requirement, and whistleblower provisions.
"What about income inequality?" AI will concentrate wealth. The Human Credit routes around this by connecting concentrated tax liability to universal human support. (See Deep Dive: The Inequality Decoupling Argument)
"Won't people be coerced to assign credits?" Real risk. Addressed through: federal crime to coerce assignment, whistleblower protection and rewards, split assignment requirements, delay between service and assignment, public education on credit sovereignty, and anonymous reporting mechanisms.
"What about rural areas and underserved populations?" Addressed through classification flexibility: higher credit values for underserved areas, remote services, nonprofit and church participation, and fungibility allowing urban corporations to buy credits from rural providers.
"Won't this cause inflation?" Not if implemented correctly. This is not new money creation—it's redirection of existing tax flows. (See Deep Dive: Inflation Independence and the Deflation Benefit)
"What happens to existing programs?" Gradual transition with no one losing benefits. See Section 10. (See Deep Dive: Entitlement Transition Specifics)
"Why should we trust corporations to help people?" We're not trusting them. We're aligning their incentives. Corporations don't help people out of goodness—they help people because that's where the tax relief is. Outcome verification ensures actual success.
"What if it fails?" The Human Credit exists one year at a time. Congress can adjust values, restructure categories, or discontinue the program based on annual results.