Stealing money from corporations affects the financial sector of the business and economy and reflects the ethical issues of the act. There are ethical issues that appear as an excuse for people to steal money from corporations. However, it raises concerns about the limits to theft. Many people wonder if the thief who steals to feed their children is justified. Regardless, there are other ethical ways to get money, regardless of the excuse. Stealing money from corporations could be, in other words, referred to as fraud or money laundering. Even though a wrong action is taken for a good cause, it does not make it ethical. Stealing money from corporations is wrong that is inexcusable, whether morally or ethically.
The ethical dilemma falls on those who argue that stealing from huge corporations is for the greater good. These are the exceptions placed on the moral stance of stealing. Therefore, the dilemma is that stealing could be good and evil (Wibowo, 2021). For instance, if the corporation acts brutally and cruelly towards the community, one might be convinced that it is right to steal from them as payback (Borg, 2022). When they sign contracts, which dictate that society would give a particular corporation a piece of land, they would be used to build companies and offer the people employed (Trevino & Nelson, 2021)). If the corporation does not hold the end of the bargain and brings workers from outside, one might be inclined to think that it is to steal from them.
The international corporation’s ethical dilemma is signing a deal with the people they do not fulfill. The article proves that the leading cause of money laundering in international corporations is the failure to pay employees or give them their agreed bonuses (Borg, 2022). Getting into such agreements jeopardizes the corporation, primarily if they cannot fulfill their end of the bargain. Another ethical dilemma is when the corporation causes problems such as pollution (Borg, 2022). The people justify stealing money from them to make them pay for noise, air, and water pollution. Some of the operations of some corporations are very risky in that they put people’s lives in danger. Such a dilemma, therefore, results in some individuals making them pay for risking the lives of others.
Stealing money from corporations mainly affects stakeholders, employees, and everyone participating in the corporation’s operations. Stealing money from a corporation would lead to a reduction of funds in the corporation (Borg, 2022). The lack of funds paralyzes the operations, especially the money going out. For instance, payment of employees and giving a good employee environment in the corporations. After investing, the profits supposed to be divided among the stakeholders are deducted to fill in the lost funds (Trevino & Nelson, 2021). Many employees face salary cuts, and others do not receive their payments.
The other affected party is the individuals who find a reason to justify stealing. For instance, one individual from the affected community takes matters into their own hands and launders money from the corporations (Borg, 2022). Many justify it as a way of paying for the losses they endured. The individuals might be employees who were sacked from their jobs or whose salaries were not paid. The other affected parties could be third parties, such as investors or debtors whose money was not paid by the company. Both sides of parties have been affected by both sides of the act.
The consequences of not fulfilling a contract by the corporation can be caused by the financial status, state of the corporation’s business, and other inevitable causes such as demography and market pressures. For instance, a corporation might not be able to offer jobs to the people who traded them land because the labor force required cannot be found among them (Borg, 2022). The corporation’s financial status might need more to pay them back or for losses caused by the company to the community. There might not be job opportunities that would prove that the company can keep its end of the bargain. Therefore, consequences such as loss of money through laundering prop up.
The consequence of money laundering could be the inability of the corporation to cope with market pressures since the funds are insufficient. The money launders could end up in jail and prosecuted for theft or fraud. It could lead to them losing their jobs and families and spending time in jail, which they could use to better their lives if they had made the right decision (Borg, 2022). Individuals who launder money from companies have much to lose since the company will still be operational afterward. Even though one might try to find a moral ground to explain the reason behind stealing, it is ethically wrong and punishable by law (Borg, 2022).
The social costs of stealing money include allowing drug traffickers, smugglers, and other criminals to expand operations and the transfer of economic power from the market, government, and citizens to criminals. In extreme cases, money laundering can lead to a complete takeover of a legitimate government.
The main consequence of the decision to analyze corporation theft is facing an ethical dilemma. The dilemma lies when the exposure takes sides. Even though stealing from corporations can be morally debatable, it is still wrong for the corporation. This analysis should discuss the effects of stealing from corporations on both parties, especially ethical-wise (Wibowo, 2018). In defending character and integrity, the corporation and community should come to a specific agreement on how to coexist together. The corporation should maintain transparency in its operations. Their contracts should be marked with consequences which should be followed when broken (Borg, 2022).
The corporation should keep its end of the deal so that it might be able to avoid an ethical crisis, which could lead them out of business. Any corporation facing a public relation issue suffers vast losses and could go out of business. Therefore, it would be wise for the company to avoid ethically conflicting issues.
Corporations also steal from the people by breaking their social contract. Social contracts are sacrifices that organizations and individuals make to benefit each other in the future. When corporations break these contracts, they steal from the community (Lobschat et al., 2021). It leads to a series of actions taken by the community, such as demonstrations and strikes. The community might even decide to kick them out of the premises (Trevino & Nelson, 2021). Individuals might also want to reciprocate by stealing back what they owe.
The community could take other alternative measures rather than stealing from corporations. The community has the power to influence the dynamics of the economy to behave ethically. They influence consumers, workers, shareholders, and citizens to set an example of the connection between the organization and the community (Borg, 2022). It would also save the economy by reducing the risks of money laundering and other related crimes, which can cause a financial crisis. It is wise that the corporation and the community come together and decide how to coexist.
Ethically, finding loopholes to justify a wrong deed for the right cause is incorrect. There is a choice to do the corresponding right deed, which could be more effective and ethical. Stealing money from corporations is wrong since it affects as many lives in it as it does outside (Borg, 2022). A much better approach would be to collaborate to specify what business owners should do to fulfill their social contract obligations. Instead of trying to steal from corporations, people should use their collective power as consumers, workers, shareholders, and citizens to pressure private-sector organizations to behave more ethically (Lobschat et al., 2021). Stealing is wrong; no matter what, there could be no moral excuse.
People might frequently judge the poor worker who steals food to provide for their family differently than the thief who steals an older man’s money to fund a luxurious life. In the current cost-of-living crisis, for example, supermarket workers have complained about turning a blind eye to theft by clearly struggling customers. The suggestion that the police should be discrete in whom they arrest for theft is worrying. This means that any wrong deed can be excused, or there could be a rule which makes it right and just. That does not mean that stealing from corporations should be excusable since the damage from the theft is admissible. Morals should not excuse some crimes since they put the integrity of the corporations and risk. They also bring about an ethical crisis, jeopardizing the business’s operations and reputation.
References
Borg, E. (2022). Is it wrong to steal from large corporations? A philosopher debates ethics. The Conversation. Web.
Lobschat, L., Mueller, B., Eggers, F., Brandimarte, L., Diefenbach, S., Kroschke, M., & Wirtz, J. (2021). Corporate digital responsibility. Journal of Business Research, 122, 875-888.
Trevino, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2021). Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right. John Wiley & Sons.
Wibowo, M. H. (2018). Corporate Responsibility in Money Laundering Crime (Perspective Criminal Law Policy in Crime of Corruption in Indonesia). Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies, 3(2), 213. Web.