I think most people would distinguish between crimes of necessity, such as feeding and clothing yourself and your family, and generating another $20 million in income.
Now, people have an amazing ability to rationalize behavior, so it's entirely possible some of those people convinced themselves that they needed to continue because they would be out on the streets with now way to provide for their family because that's all they knew, but I think it's important to distinguish irrational thinking such as that and the reality of the situation when discussing it.
1: "Out on the streets" could very well have been well above the poverty line and quite comfortable given their likely assets and resources, but unfortunately it's all to often a relative assessment that is made, where relatively worse still may be quite comfortable on an absolute (or relative to the region) scale.
You're right. It is easy to rationalize this sort of behavior. But I think there's a few things going on, that mutate normal action/response.
1. Family. Doing this the "right way" would mean fessing up. And that means alienating and testifying against family. Unless they're Hannibal The Cannibal, or other absolutely horrible crimes against humanity, you're not going to want to destroy your family and the business.
2. Inertia. It was already done, we're just doing it how it was done before. (Insert "Cause everyone else does it").
Sure, I was referring more to the general case, which may or may not include family or friends (beyond co-worker friends). Family obviously makes it harder to report, but I don' t think it's in any way a requirement.
Inertia is a big one though, I think your're spot on there.
Now, people have an amazing ability to rationalize behavior, so it's entirely possible some of those people convinced themselves that they needed to continue because they would be out on the streets with now way to provide for their family because that's all they knew, but I think it's important to distinguish irrational thinking such as that and the reality of the situation when discussing it.
1: "Out on the streets" could very well have been well above the poverty line and quite comfortable given their likely assets and resources, but unfortunately it's all to often a relative assessment that is made, where relatively worse still may be quite comfortable on an absolute (or relative to the region) scale.