You're proving my point. 31% of total income is quite a bit more tax than 22% of consumer spending (which is a fraction of total income).

For a resident with $100,000 income... $31,000 in income taxes. Assuming no savings and all consumption taxed at 22%, that's ~$15k in consumption taxes. Total tax burden ~$46k.

For a US-based nomad with $100k income, paying US income taxes (~20% fed/state combined), that's $80k to spend and <$18k in total taxes.

$28,000 delta. That $28k is being spent on something (military, police, whatever). Maybe the nomad isn't using any services that the $28k delta is funding. I don't know. But, just on the rough math, a nomad pays less in tax than a resident.

I guess the real question is does a nomad use services more like a short-term tourist or more like a long-term resident? And does the consumption taxes paid end up as a positive or a negative? How long does a nomad have to reside in an area to consume enough services to need to pay income tax? I don't know the answer - I only know the nomad is absolutely paying less in total tax burden than a resident.