According to ''Ethical Considerations''

Write 500-700 words on "Does a government have a right to take your money (or land, or intellectual property, or other rights) in order to do what it "thinks" is "best"?

Your answer may be shaped one way if it is the United States government that is doing the taking, but remember that the question is asked in an international business environment. So what if the government that is doing the taking of your property is Venezuela, or South Africa, or North Korea, or ISIS (back when ISIS controlled physical space and someone could argue that it was something like an independent political body)? If you answer that a government does not such a right, then how do you justify tax at all? Aren't governmental prerogatives like national defense, police services, public schooling, and public health care all a taking from individuals to do what the government thinks is best? If your answer is that governments do have such powers, then what is the barrier that stops the government from simply taking everything, or worse, taking everything from some people and not taking anything from another--or even, taking from one person and giving to another? And if you think that this last one is not possible, think back to the ethical considerations from the end of Chapter 1, p44, number 1 on that page. can't the payment of this "commission" be seen as another kind of taking: from the people of the country (through their tax base) to the individual receiving the commission? How should such takings be limited?