Laws are not capable of withstanding the kind of gamesmanship and time-geo-varying-interpretative arbitrage that multinational companies spin against all the co

Laws are not capable of withstanding the kind of gamesmanship and time-geo-varying-interpretative arbitrage that multinational companies spin against all the countries in which they operate or generate business. The idea that tax rules are absolute entities defined within geographical lines in the instantaneous moment has always struck me as pretty flawed. The lie that regulations define an absolute set of rules with no room for subjectivity is used as a weapon by the biggest rule breakers -- who argue that subjectivity both exists and does not exist as needed to suit their position. Intent really does need to be part of the definition of law -- the idea that law can exist without a model of intent is flawed beyond hope. It's high time we acknowledge that there exists acts which explicitly violate the intent of law -- and that there exist criteria for deciding when this is indistinguishable from violating the letter of the law.