There is a difference between legal and ethical and there is a dimension of Apple's reputation that draws from ethical behavior. Tim Cooks argument is I am suc

There is a difference between legal and ethical and there is a dimension of Apple's reputation that draws from ethical behavior. Tim Cooks argument is I am successfull and am producing n number of jobs and without my success the state would lose taxes from these x economic activity so I should basically not pay taxes and be rewarded for my success with a tax cut. While this Somalia argument completely ignoring government services can be made, its not part of the current economic and political system and social contract in which Apple has grown, exists and benefits from in higly educated employees and a rich stable ecosystem and marketplace. We may not agree with laws but we hardly have a choice to comply because of difference of opinion. The fact that one may have resources to game the system does not make it right. No one is stopping Apple from having this discussion but this does not give them any special privileges to avoid paying their fair share or justifying the act post. The bigger problem is the intentionally placed loopholes in the global financial system to aid creativity in tax avoidance. This is not an accident, these loopholes have been lobbied for and inserted by vested interests and must be removed to retain credibility and trust in the global financial system. Or loopholes should be placed for everyone. As in individuals outsourcing their labour to a holding entity in a low tax zone, being paid in this low tax zone and importing funds as required by paying a small percentage than they would be otherwise liable. This race to the bottom will drive all individuals to these low-tax states as it is driving crafty companies and the average state then won't have any revenue to offer any services. This simply won't be be acceptable for individuals and won't be accepted by any country, so why is it acceptable for billion dollar entities.