Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
You've put the rabbit in the hat at the end of your post, assuming law and morality are interchangeable. If a person knowingly breaks a law but believes he is justified in doing so he is not acting immorally. If a person complies with the law and exploits a loophole to great advantage he internally feels is unfair he may be acting immorally.
|
Fair enough, although I suspect we're talking past each other with loopholes versus aggressive tax compliance. Not being a tax lawyer, I'm not aware how many true "loopholes" there are. And, for that matter, in everyday life how many "loopholes" there are that allow people to avoid compliance with the spirit of the law while still remaining true to its terms. Quite often "loopholes" are intentional--sometimes misguided, but intentional nonetheless.
ETA: As for morality/legality, it seems to me that in the vast majority of instances the two are the same. Sure, there are instances where something illegal may nonetheless be moral, and probably fewer instances where something legal is immoral (putting aside those things that no statute has yet addressed). With respect to taxation in general, while I don't like the high levels of taxation we generally face in this country, I don't think they're at a level that could be considered immoral in and of itself--they simply aren't confiscatory enough (now the 90% tax rate from the mid-century might reach that point). I just can't see a moral difference between, say, 20% overall tax rate and a 30% overall tax rate. For sure I prefer the former, but if I'm outvoted, so be it.
