Because of diminishing returns. The tax burden follows the Pareto Principle as much as income does. When you read that rousing NYT headline, what you have to k

Because of diminishing returns. The tax burden follows the Pareto Principle as much as income does. When you read that rousing NYT headline, what you have to keep in mind is, these taxpayers may have well "saved" a substantial fraction off their tax bill, but it still was a mere fraction. For example, in the UK, the top percentile contributes a third of the overall income tax[1]. When you have a tax bill for a few dozen million US$, it is not that difficult to justify paying a team of accountants and lawyers who bill $1k/h each to shave 20% off the top. When your tax burden is in the thousands, you will be best served by a chartered accountant who can shave the same 20% for you, but in your case that will be several hundred dollars. There are no "loopholes" in the tax code in the sense that the Congress didn't foresee tax avoidance techniques, or the courts are somehow ill-equipped. There are (1) tax incentives, (2) bribery, and (3) notoriously underfunded IRS. (1) scales pretty well, whereas (2) and (3) don't. [1] http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2107031/UK-Budget-2012-Top-1-earners-contribute-income-tax.html http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2107031/UK-B...