I don't think the relationship between what the tax laws induce businesses to do, and what we as a society intended to them to do, is particularly straightforward. A lot of tax strategies seem more like emergent effects of multiple laws, often passed by several different jurisdictions, and often in different circumstances than the present ones.
So innovating the double Irish with a Dutch sandwich is "following" the law? It's more akin to hacking or circumventing them while still staying legal. Just because something is legal does not mean that it was the spirit of the law or the intention of society. That's why you see laws being changed to frequently to adapt to new scenarios and "innovations".
Not to mention that society hasn't much of a say these days, Congressmen need campaign money from corporate firms. As they re-invest some of that saved money into politicians to further gain more money, what chance does an individual voter have? Voting people out doesn't matter much when the alternatives are almost the same and need money for their re-election too.
And yet, we are the ones who have voted for these people who have created this system. It's not like the voters are without agency; I can still vote for the nominee with $100 in her bank account even if her opponent has $1 trillion in his.