The issue is that you can already do this by using a corporation incorporated in a jurisdiction with no (or lower) corporate income tax -- which is what international companies and billionaires do and it gives them an unfair advantage, so we should level the playing field.
Meanwhile notice what you're really doing -- you pay no income tax only because you have no income. But that only works as long as you never want to spend the money. Which works great for Apple, because they don't have anything to spend the money on anyway, but they're already doing that.
The consultant making $100K is going to have to choose between spending the money (and so paying the tax on it) or taking a vow of poverty, because you have no equity to borrow against if it wasn't already at some point taxable income, and once you've spent that you still want to eat.
Not true. Apple spends boatloads of money on dividends and share repurchases. Apple doesn't pay taxes on that, but shareholders do.
How will you pay back the loan without income? Company you will pay you income that is taxed.
Eventually the company sells the house and pays taxes.
It might defer taxes, but won’t avoid them.