I can think of societies with massive tax evasion, from all economic classes of people and where bribes are normal. Is there something wrong with laws requiring tax payments and banning bribes?

Sure, when people aren't getting reasonable ROI from that tax money - e.g. it's invested poorly and not invested in a way that's improving enough of their own community.

Imagine if paying tax was voluntary - how relatively quickly communities of people who valued and understood the value of that pooling and who voted in competent politicians to manage their community would thrive/grow vs. the free-for-all and deterioration of infrastructure in areas where people opted not to pay; mind you private businesses may provide better services and people using them is them voting for their existence (voluntary payment) - though arguably initially before enough wealth was generated it would have been impossible to borrow the $100s of billions needed to start massive infrastructure projects; from my understanding there's a bit of this, along with more or less corrupting, in Democratic vs. Republican leaning states.

Re: bribes - I'd argue that amount of people wouldn't fit within the definition of following the spirit of the mechanism - you need a foundation with integrity to start for it to be an honest signal; or it's the reverse, the anti, bribery a sign of a lack of integrity and accountability in the system.

Yes, because the law (and the systems supporting the law) can easily be evaded - there is something massively wrong.

I'd be concerned about laws so onerous that a police state is needed to get compliance.

Take a look at economist C. Northcote Parkinson's books. He points out that when tax rates are 10%, people happily pay their taxes as their duty to live in society. People who cheat get ostracized. Various things start going awry at 20% and 30%, and at 40% tax evasion becomes the national pastime. People regard as fools people who don't evade taxes.

Think about the people who are running away from California due to their confiscatory taxes, and then California goes after them claiming they still are residents. Think about the people in government who openly want to dismantle the wealthy - like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

What do you think will happen?

That’s a separate issue. I was talking about countries that lack the tribal trust between its members such that it is presumed it’s every man or sub tribe for themselves.

This lack of trust is an unquantifiable cost in the progress of that society, one that the US was blessed to not be burdened with, and to which I credit the strength of the nation.

But that’s beside the point, which is I don’t think a simple statement like “if everyone breaks the law then the law is bad” is valid.