[to11mtm]

In theory, sure, but reality is a bit of a prisoner's dilemma.

Consider:

Person A is evading Taxes.

Person B is not evading taxes.

Government says 'Well, we aren't getting enough money', So they raise taxes on those who can't realistically evade. By a second order effect, Person A is causing Person B to get 'stolen from' twice instead of once.

[henvic]

I'd say it doesn't work like this. Instead, the state will try to charge as much as possible taxes from both of them while providing the least amount of service possible so someone not paying tax has a really low impact overall on the services the state is able to provide.

They charge tax way higher than any of the services they provide truly cost (even if we put any efficiency concerns aside).

I'd even argue this impact is positive given that now money is freely circulating in society for other stuff. For me, society will eventually have other ways to finance infrastructure and social benefits that are not based on taxes, as it happens today – but this doesn't even mean something entirely new. Let's remember most fire companies, schools, hospitals, and other stuff we rely upon are either privately maintained (for-profit or not), the concept started like so, or both.