I don't think anyone has done the legwork to link "your taxes" and a moral aspect. There are a lot of basic unresolved questions (if Jeff Bezos pays more in taxes than you earn in your lifetime, has he payed his fair share? Why/why not? Are the standards used to work that out some sort of objective moral or just a reflection of personal interest speaking? A suspicious number of moral justifications involve other people paying all the taxes & not the moraliser). And a company like Apple has had a bigger positive influence on my lifestyle than a large number of government agencies. Some of those agencies are trying to make my life worse as far as I reckon it.

If the law says some entity must pay X tax it is uncertain what it would mean, in practice, to claim "their taxes" were really Y, some other amount they aren't legally obliged to pay.

> The whole idea that you can make a billion dollar business without being hugely dependent on the infrastructure, education, history, societal background etc that has largely been paid for by...taxes...is utter fallacy.

A business is a hypothetical entity, a term for a system of organising people to do things. Things that are measurably in high demand. It is profoundly uncertain that diverting money out of those systems is a good idea. Observing that businesses rely on their context does not start or end the argument about how much tax they should pay.