> You get certain things in exchange, like laws that protect your property.
With the important difference that the price is non-negotiable, and set by the service provider alone. The people highlighted on the website chose to park their property elsewhere, so the government had zero cost in protecting that.
The price is not in proportion to the quality of service at all, it's proportional to the income of the citizen. Which is consistent with what most people understand taxes to be: a wealth redistribution mechanism, rather than a service fee.
> If you avoid taxes, you are stealing from everybody.
If all the people which avoid some taxes currently (basically every large corporation) close down operations in the US and move to a country with more favorable conditions, the theft (under your definition) would stop. Do you think the net gain would be positive?
In addition, if "not mentioning 3 mn" is theft, then surely "wasting 3 mn" as government official is theft as well.
However, this type of accountability is somehow not there. So it seems the rules are different, depending on what side you are.
Finally, a fundamental property law states that something is your property unless you voluntarily pass the claim to someone else. This principle certainly holds between private entities. The question is why it doesn't hold for the state?
>With the important difference that the price is non-negotiable, and set by the service provider alone.
Hunh? Most (all) of the states involved have some form of democratic government don't they? I know some of them still have monarchs (why?), but I believe their policy makers are elected by the general population, are they not?
Democracy is a pack of wolves voting on which sheep to have for dinner.
Now, what I'd like to see is each person's vote multiplied by the amount he pays in taxes (all taxes: property, sales, income &c.). That would be fair, and it'd give an incentive to pay up too.
Fair point, but it seems relevant to acknowledge that the American campaign finance system as presently organized is exactly isomorphic to the "selling political power" you mention above.
If all the people which avoid some taxes currently (basically every large corporation) close down operations in the US and move to a country with more favorable conditions, the theft (under your definition) would stop. Do you think the net gain would be positive?
Considering that selling in the US is so profitable and the market for buying stuff in the US is so competitive, that's very unlikely to happen. Most US companies would experience a catastrophic fall in income if they stopped doing business in the US.
You don't pay taxes for specific services. You pay taxes because it is the law. The money you have to pay for taxes is not your property. It belongs to the state. If you illegally transfer untaxed money out of the country, you aren't "parking your property elsewhere", you are stealing public money.
If you don't want to pay taxes in a country, then don't do business in a country.
Quite so - but in reality, it turns out that most people don't want to live in those jurisdictions, but prefer to be close to their largest market, or remain in their home countries for non-financial reasons, like family, cultural, or language ties.
Taxation for corporations is a very different thing from taxation for individuals. Companies pay for the privilige of doing business on the territory. I don't really think Apple Inc would be fine if they suddenly can't sell in the US, or can't employ US citizens, or can't benefit from US foreign relations.
With the important difference that the price is non-negotiable, and set by the service provider alone. The people highlighted on the website chose to park their property elsewhere, so the government had zero cost in protecting that.
The price is not in proportion to the quality of service at all, it's proportional to the income of the citizen. Which is consistent with what most people understand taxes to be: a wealth redistribution mechanism, rather than a service fee.
> If you avoid taxes, you are stealing from everybody.
If all the people which avoid some taxes currently (basically every large corporation) close down operations in the US and move to a country with more favorable conditions, the theft (under your definition) would stop. Do you think the net gain would be positive?