The biggest differences are that Scott suggests a credit of only ~$13k per adult and ~$4.5k per minor, and Scott suggests primarily funding this through eliminating deductions and imposing both a carbon tax and a VAT.
His point was that the credit should be large enough to make work optional. 13K per year is less than minimum wage. A person working full time making minimum wage makes $7.25*40*52, or $15,080. The political left has bemoaned for years how that is not a “living wage”, and that a living wage should be $15 an hour, or $31,200 a year.
So, I guess my response to that is that 13K a year isn’t realistic if the goal is to “make work optional” or even to allow somebody to survive at subsistence level; the 13K has to be jacked up substantially, and therefore the taxation suggestions fall well short of what would be required.
Not that the taxation suggestions would have a shot at being passed, of course.