The existence of these loopholes creates two options: 1) Follow the spirit of the law, which is that on your death, your assets are taxed as they are passed on

The existence of these loopholes creates two options: 1) Follow the spirit of the law, which is that on your death, your assets are taxed as they are passed on, thus you contribute to funding the laws and society we are supposedly working together to create. 2) Do work to avoid having to give up anything, even though you can easily afford it, and you'll be dead anyway. I don't see how #2 is ethically the same as #1. He doesn't have to do the most selfish thing just because he isn't technically being forced otherwise. Caveat that I haven't researched if this guy is giving tons of money away otherwise or something, I'm just trying to explain why I think it's fair for people to criticize this behavior even though it might be legal.