If you don't take tax at face value and see it as an optimization game, and only focus on what is to be gained (or what is to be lost), I can easily see why one might want to minimize their tax liability. To what lengths would you go to save 100'000$ a year? I don't earn that much, so I'd probably do a lot, as long as it's legal. I hate to advocate for the devil here, and I do believe everyone should be paying their fair share, but I don't think this issue is clear cut at all. Some ways to decrease one's tax liability exist due to government policies to encourage a particular behavior, sometimes it's to subsidize a behavior or a status quo. Tax isn't just a way to transfer wealth (but it often seems to be, and often is for the poorer part of countries), but it's also a way to shape behaviors. The unfortunate fact is that trying to incentivize or disincentivize certain behaviors for a large body of people will often introduce loopholes that can be exploited. However, some incentives end up being vital some livelihoods or behaviors that the country depends on. Not to say there aren't any cases where the loopholes are unambiguously bad.