Well they have a right to petition the government in the US at least. Would you say the same about what citizens prefer does not matter in a representative democracy?

Citizens tend to be all over the place when it comes to taxation. Traditional corporations are pure profit seeking entities. What they would -prefer- is to pay no taxes at all, while benefiting from all tax paid services they can. So I'm not really sure, given we're talking hypotheticals here anyway, that designing a system to tax corporations based on what they -prefer- is really going to get us anywhere. The current system, whereby many major corporations pay nothing in taxes, while benefiting from major government subsidies, directly and indirectly, is already pretty close to what they'd -prefer-.

>would -prefer- is to pay no taxes at all, while benefiting from all tax paid services they can.

I think you could probably preface the above with the word “citizens” and it would still be true. But both citizens and corporations have the right to lobby their representatives in their own interest. It’s the politicians job to try and create policy that balances the interests of all their constituents.

I addressed citizens in the very first sentence.

I, personally, would happily pay -more- in taxes, if it meant that, for instance, we stopped all fundraising for elections (and instead candidates had a set amount to spend per race), and also if we provided healthcare to everyone.

Ah, ok I didn’t realize context of “all over the place” meant in terms of reasons for taxation. I do think there is a growing movement in business to have a multi-dimensional focus. B-Corps are one example.