So, you are no longer saying that tax avoidance is immoral, or is it only immoral if it's on multiples of more than 10's of thousands? Or if it's by cash rich multi-nationals or skint Scottish football teams from Glasgow?
If it goes against my own morals then it's immoral. Tax avoidance by big business is immoral. in my opinion.
Classic "cake and eat it" scenario. So it's only immoral if it's a lot of money? And you're basing your opinion on your own monetary income which lends itself for me to think that if you were a millionaire, then you wouldn't see tax avoidance is a problem unless it's for hundreds of millions, or if you were a multi-millionaire, then no problem unless the tax avoidance was for billions... It's either immoral or not, don't put a currency value on it.
Totally disagree. Companies avoiding paying millions in corporation tax to bolster their already huge profits is NOT the same as jimmy the plumber doing the odd cash-in-hand job. They might both be technically 'wrong' but the scale does make a difference - how can it not? I find it bizarre that anyone would have such a black and white view of this issue.
...and you cannot excuse tax avoidance on one hand then moan about benefit cheats, IMHO (or think skimming your benefits is cool without applying the same opportunist ideology to multinationals). Both affect the same pot of money.
Tax avoidance is 'bad'. But the scale of tax avoidance/evasion is obviously important. If Jimmy the Plumber does a cash in hand job for his mate, that's a bit naughty but in the grand scheme of things who really gives a ****? If he does all his jobs cash in hand and doesn't pay any income tax at all, then he's a freeloading arsehole who deserves to be prosecuted. Does anyone really disagree with that? Absolute morality in general, not just in paying your taxes, is pretty impractical. Not to mention being the reserve of scary religious types in my experience.
Of course there are different scales but the morality is the same, which is what was being discussed.
If you steal a sweetie, you're a thief. If you steal £1,000,000, you're a thief. Same crime but different scales - that's why the criminal sentences for each is different. It would be ridiculous to suggest the same punishment for things on opposite sides of the scale, but they are the same crime
The morality isn't necessarily the same. It depends on the motivation behind and/or the consequences of the action. Michael stealing Trevelyan's corn to feed his family is not the moral equivalent to some wee ****e half-inching a bottle of bucky from the corner shop to get steamboats down the park. And I'd argue Joe Average doing the odd job cash in hand for his mates is less reprehensible that Man City striker Diego Multimillionaira getting away with paying 1% tax because he can afford clever accountants. Both are tax avoidance/evasion.
