No, that is the very point. We encode the social contract in a system of rules. When you deliberately manipulate those rules to avoid the spirit or original intent of the contract, then you are breaking that contract, regardless of whether it is legal or not.
This is the framework under which I consider tax avoidance to be unethical -- obviously if you do not support the society in the first place, you might disagree.
> We encode the social contract in a system of rules. When you deliberately manipulate those rules to avoid the spirit of the contract, then you are breaking that contract, regardless of whether it is legal or not.
Then change the rules. We have a mechanism for that purpose.
My god man, it's like you didn't even read my earlier post.
If you disagree with me, put forth an argument, but you raised the point like I hadn't already mentioned it.
>The more effort people spend avoiding taxes, the more complicated the tax system will get as it attempts to close those loopholes. The more complicated it gets, the harder it is to form a social contract that represents the best interest of the nation.
Also, I hadn't mentioned the courts once, and in fact stressed multiple times that I'm not talking about the legality of the situation.
This is the framework under which I consider tax avoidance to be unethical -- obviously if you do not support the society in the first place, you might disagree.