Ethics of tax planning

[garbon]

Damn. Seeds be castrated. Momma vM won't let him take any independent actions.

[Admiral Yi]

"Tax planning" seems like a euphemism.

[CountDeMoney]

Damn. Seeds be castrated. Momma vM won't let him take any independent actions.

No shit, right?  What an asshole.

[alfred russel]

Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.

[garbon]

Damn. Seeds be castrated. Momma vM won't let him take any independent actions.

No shit, right?  What an asshole.

As he keeps doing it for Marti, perhaps he just wants to get his concrete up in that.

[Berkut]

Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.

Of course.

However, there is a point at which tax evasion becomes ethically suspect.

And if you claim to be one of the richest men in America, while at the same time don't actually pay taxes, it is a safe bet that while you might be strictly legal, you are very likely well beyond the level of ethical.

More importantly, it puts your plan of reducing taxes on people like you even more into a very different light than otherwise.

[DontSayBanana]

Unethical, but given the burden it can place on lower incomes, it does also beg the question of how ethical our current tax structure is.  No vote because none of the options allow for that level of nuance (unethical, but necessary to deal with an already-unethical system).

[alfred russel]

Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.

Of course.

However, there is a point at which tax evasion becomes ethically suspect.

And if you claim to be one of the richest men in America, while at the same time don't actually pay taxes, it is a safe bet that while you might be strictly legal, you are very likely well beyond the level of ethical.

More importantly, it puts your plan of reducing taxes on people like you even more into a very different light than otherwise.

I think your post is a bit of a logical muddle.

-You agree that people can arrange affairs to be as low as possible
-You toss in the concept of tax evasion, which is a crime, and associate it with unethical behavior
-Then you come back to the idea that the idea that a man's tax arrangements might be strictly legal, which by definition means it is not tax evasion
-Then you connect the potentially legal nonpayment of taxes with the illegal behavior you considered unethical

Then on top of that you connect it to a public policy position, for which I don't see a connection.

For example, I don't think the home mortgage interest deduction is sound public policy, but if you think that means I'm unethical because I take advantage of it, I think you are being nonsensical. 

[Grinning_Colossus]

Contextually unethical, in that all of Trump's assets should be seized. And then his body should be placed in a big centrifuge and separated into its raw materials, which should then be sold on the open market with the proceeds redistributed equally among the population.

[Admiral Yi]

Contextually unethical, in that all of Trump's assets should be seized. And then his body should be placed in a big centrifuge and separated into its raw materials, which should then be sold on the open market with the proceeds redistributed equally among the population.

Certainly the raw materials that constitute his body were not illicitly obtained, and should therefore transfer to his family.

[Martinus]

Where I differ from Berkut is that when dealing with the state treasury/tax collection apparatus there is, imo, no area which can be described as "legal but unethical" (which is obviously different from dealing with individuals, where such area exists). If you obey the law (which means also that you are committing no fraud), you are not - and should not - be accused of any unethical activity if you seek to reduce your taxation.

[Valmy]

I don't know. Pretending you are a company from the Cayman Islands when you are not seems a bit unethical. Not sure if that is covered under the 'fraud' thing though.

[The Brain]

To fail to plan is to plan to fail.

[Martinus]

I don't know. Pretending you are a company from the Cayman Islands when you are not seems a bit unethical. Not sure if that is covered under the 'fraud' thing though.

It depends what you mean by "pretending you are a company". If you lie e.g. by saying your management sits in the Cayman Islands etc. then it is a fraud. But if you just set up a vehicle to benefit from better tax treatment without lying, then why should it be unethical? Blame legislators for allowing that to happen legally.

Tax rules are technical rules, there is no inherent ethics to them (and there is nothing ethical about paying more taxes than you have to). It's like rules for driving on the road. If the legislators set up a rule that, if you are coming from the right side at an intersection, you have right of way before someone who comes from the left, then it would be bizarre to argue that you should nonetheless not use that right of way and that letting someone coming from the left side go first is somehow more ethical.

[Zanza]

I find it reasonable to set up your affairs in a way to pay the least legal amount of taxes. Tax advisory is a normal profession here.

I don't see how that would be unethical as long as you only use legal means.

A lot of policy making here also revolves around tax breaks for certain behavior the state wants to support. So it is well published how you need to e.g. save money for retirement in the most tax friendly way.

That said corporate tax avoidance through complicated shell firms etc. doesn't seem to serve any societal purpose and I would not mind seeing it reduced. Go Vestager!