It's easy to think of a UBI scheme that doesn't change the net tax you pay to the government. For instance, everyone gets an extra $10,000 a year, everyone pays

It's easy to think of a UBI scheme that doesn't change the net tax you pay to the government. For instance, everyone gets an extra $10,000 a year, everyone pays an extra $10,000 a year. No change in the net amount of money people pay, no change in the federal government. But that doesn't do anything, so let's tweak it a little. Everyone gets an extra $10,000 a year, everyone pays an extra $10,000 a year, except you use TANF money to offset that payment for lower income families. So if you're above the TANF threshold, you see no difference, like in the first scenario. If you are below the TANF threshold, you're only paying back some of the $10,000 you get (the rest being paid with TANF funds). Again, no increase in taxes, no increase in the budget. You can keep fiddling with the numbers - you can use food stamp money to lower the amount those on the lower end need to pay back (or increase the payout), and keep using other funds allocated for the impoverished to do the same. These types of plans would all be neutral in terms of tax burden and the federal budget. Why would you do this? It'd be much simpler and better than the current system in a lot of ways. If you loose your job you automatically have the supplemental income - you don't have to worry about navigating a dozen different government agencies. You don't have to worry about going in for drug testing if some governor decides to make that mandatory for assistance, or any of the other junk that comes with stigmatized assistance (since everyone would be getting the assistance, the difference would only be at the tax end, which already exists). Now, I'd argue that increased taxes on the wealthy to bolster the program is a good idea. I'd also argue that if people think helping the impoverished in their country is "no benefit" to them, that's part of a much broader problem (the same problem where people are happy to watch the infrastructure of their country collapse if it means they pay a few hundred dollars a year less in taxes). But even if you don't want to increase the tax burden on anyone - not even the richest citizens - you can still devise workable UBI implementations.