-
I agree they have said that. But leaving out what they said (barefaced).
Isn't tax evasion always immoral, but tax avoidance a sliding scale, where at one end it's an ISA at your regular bank, and the other it's no different *except for the legality bit* to evasion?
Some forms of tax avoidance could be seen as simply paying as much tax as you should no less but certainly no more.
hoefla-
That's the key point IMO. If something is an established product that has been deliberately created to incentivise a positive action (e.g. pensions for people saving for retirement) then no immorality has occurred. If you have to consult with an army of specialist tax accountants to construct something then it's pretty obvious at that point that you are exploiting a loophole, rather than benefitting from an established tax break.
Edit - Greenbank beat me to it.
jimmy_james
Consequentially, absolutely. That is, if you're happily immoral, but don't want to risk going to jail.
One could easily make an argument that morally they're the same thing. In fact, I think both Cameron and Osborne did just that.