Tax fraud, which is also commonly referred as to tax scamming, can be defined in various ways. On the one hand, tax scamming included a positive deception of the tax services, or infringement of duties stipulated by the legislature. The tax services, thus, can be accused of false representation of the information, or of failure of disclosing true information. On the other hand, the concealed data can be further used for fulfilling false accounting operations contradicting all the acts issued by the law. It is not weird that, tax scamming frequently occurs to small businesses and individuals who claim their personal purchases under their business’s names and try to make refund. What is more important is that, apart from legal issues, such cases presuppose the ignorance of ethical aspects in the sphere of accounting. Hence, an ethical dilemma arises, as small businesses and individuals resort to all possible ways, both legal and illegal, to get a tax deduction for their personal expenses. Such situations are not ethical both towards the government and toward the companies’ employees whose salaries should be extracted. There different ways and schemes of tax scams in small businesses conducted for the purpose of raising net income and minimizing the deductions from the firms’ annual incomes. For instance, the owners of small business deceive their employees and authorized organs to withhold the taxes from their salaries (Kaplan 174). They claim that some information about the company is concealed because it is too confidential. Others owners avoiding taxation revealed some that they need a special deduction for Afro-Americans as reimbursement for slavery or as help in preparing a refund claim. Of course, in viewing the problem ethically, small business whose incomes suffer from abusive taxations, as their main goal is to justify the inputs made by investors, to produce the outputs for the customers and to benefit from sales. A bright example of neglecting the governmental needs is revealed in the newspaper article called Revenues halts tax settlements where taxpayers concluded an agreement with the Inland Revenue on the “unpaid taxes” basis (“Revenue halts tax settlements” n.p.). Here, the ethical dilemma consists in constipation between the taxpayers of Hansard settlement and the Revenue’s tax officers that was arranged on an interest basis. On the one hand, this agreement does not contradict the main goals of organizational performance, as each part is satisfied with the results. On the other hand, when considering the third party, which is the government, the Inland Revenue is an intermediary between the taxpayers and governmental tax organizations. More importantly, the taxpayers do not feel any responsibility for breaking the law and ignoring their duties in front of the government and other people of the country. The second case of tax scamming is just the opposite. The article called Ernst & Young partners charged with tax fraud investigates the case about the accounting company Ernst & Young that was accused of scam conspiracy and other related crimes (Herman and Lindsay n.p.). The accused created false tax returns containing vague clients’ motivations for concluding agreements and transactions. They als