He has already stated that fAt. No assumption is necessary. He will use our income to "pay himself back" that money he never gave to the company. I have seen his scam before, actually had to litigate it once.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE:
He "invests" $10K and BOTH gives himself the shares for it and a loan agreement for it. Anybody checking about either of these transactions finds supporting data. You have to accidently check for (and notice) that the substantiating data is the same for both "transactions". He then either pays himself back (the loan) or sell the shares usually at a premium to market. In either case, he ends up having stole something from the company and without an independent audit, it is almost impossible for anyone else to detect, (even the SEC)
"Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."