A most fundamental Halachah which describes how Jews should relate to the surrounding society is “dina d’malchuta dina” (Bava Batra 54b). Literally translated, this means, “The law of the land is the law.” A fuller explanation is that Halachah demands obedience to the laws promulgated by the civil authorities. There is much discussion as to the precise parameters of this Halachah (see Encyclopedia Talmudit 7:295-308 for a summary; for a discussion to what extent rabbinical judges consider incorporating civil law in their decisions, see our earlier chapter entitled “Firing a Pregnant Woman – the Application of Dina d’malchuta Dina”). In this chapter, we shall elucidate a responsum authored by Rav Ovadia Yosef (Teshuvot Yechave Da’at 5:64) regarding the halachic obligation for Israeli citizens to pay income tax to the State of Israel’s treasury.
Dina d’malchuta Dina – A Torah Obligation
Rav Yosef cites Beit Shmuel (E, H. 28:3), who rules that dina d’malchuta dina is a merely rabbinic obligation. However, Rav Ovadia cites Avnei Milu’im (28:2) and Teshuvot Chatam Sofer (Y.D. 314), who vigorously dispute Beit Shmuel's assertion and rule that it is a Torah-level obligation to honor civil laws. Indeed, Rav Yosef marshals evidence to this ruling from the Rashba’s commentary to Nedarim 28a (s.v. B'Mocheis) and concludes, “From the words of the Rishonim (authorities of the Middle Ages), it is evident that they subscribe to the opinion of the Chatam Sofer.” Proof that dina d’malchuta dina constitutes a Torah-level obligation may be derived from Rashi (Gittin 9b s.v. D’dina) who presents the Torah level obligation for all of humanity to establish just laws and societies (dinim) as the basis for dina d’malchuta dina.
Dina d’Malchuta Dina in Eretz Yisrael
Rav Ovadia continues his discussion by citing the celebrated opinion of the Ran (Nedarim 28a s.v. B’Mocheis Ha’Omeid, citing Tosafot) and the Rashba that dina d’malchuta dina does not apply to taxes in Eretz Yisrael. They argue that dina d’malchuta dina applies only outside of Eretz Yisrael, where kings own the lands and enjoy the right to banish residents who disobey orders (for alternative theories as to why we must observe the law of the land, see Encyclopedia Talmudit 7:295-297). However, this is not true of Jewish kings, since all Jews are partners in Eretz Yisrael, and the king does not own Eretz Yisrael more than any other Jew does.
Rav Yosef, however, notes that the Rambam (Hilchot Gezeilah Va’Aveidah 5:11 and in his commentary to the Mishnah Nedarim 3:4) and the Meiri (Nedarim 28a) specifically mention that dina d’malchuta dina applies to both Jewish and non-Jewish kings.153Rav Yosef also quotes the Rashba (Teshuvot 2:134), who rules that dina d'malchuta dina applies to those laws of Jewish kings which are designed to protect the people. According to Rav Yosef, taxes are included in this category, since the government uses the taxes to promote the security of its citizens. . The Beit Yosef (C.M. 369 s.v. U’Mah She’Amar Bein She’hu Melech) marshals evidence to this opinion from the Gemara (Bava Kama 113a). This passage seeks to interpret a Mishnah in Nedarim (3:4) which seems to imply that we do not follow the rule of dina d’malchuta dina. The Gemara answers that the Mishnah applies to unjust tax collection. The Beit Yosef observes that the Gemara does not answer that dina d’malchuta dina does not apply to Jewish kings in Eretz Yisrael and that this is what the Mishnah in Nedarim speaks about.
Indeed, both the Tur (C.M. 369) and the Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 369:6) rule that dina d’malchuta dina applies to both Jewish and non-Jewish kings, and none of the commentaries to the Shulchan Aruch challenge this ruling. Rav Ovadia notes that we do not enjoy the right to follow halachic authorities whose opinions are not cited in the Shulchan Aruch or its commentaries. Thus, the opinion that dina d’malchuta dina applies even in Eretz Yisrael constitutes normative Halachah.
Dina d’malchuta Dina in a Democracy
Even though the Rishonim and Shulchan Aruch speak of “kings,” Rav Ovadia Yosef rules that dina d’malchuta dina applies in a democracy. He marshals two proofs to this assertion. He cites Bava Kama 113a, as did the Beit Yosef, which does not simply resolve the problematic Mishnah of Nedarim 3:4 by stating that it speaks of a country that is not ruled by a king. Indeed, Rav Yosif notes that Chazal were aware of countries that were not ruled by a king, most famously Rome (as noted by Tosafot, Avodah Zarah 10b s.v. Kol Nesi’eha).
His second proof is from Rava (Bava Kama 113b) supporting the principle of dina d’malchuta dina from the fact that the government “cuts trees and builds bridges from them, and we utilize the bridges.” This reasoning surely applies in a democracy as well as a monarchy; thus, dina d’malchuta dina applies in a democracy as well. One could add that it is certainly the case that dina d’malchuta dina applies in a government that is (in the famous words of Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg address) “of the people, by the people, for the people,” since the government does not collect taxes to enrich the leadership, as is the case in a monarchy. Rather, a democratic government collects taxes to pay for the vital services it provides, such as the military, police, roads, etc. One pays taxes in a democracy to pay for the services rendered, as Halachah requires one who has been provided with a service to pay for it (Bava Kama 55b, Bava Metzia 76a and 101a, and Bava Batra 4b).
Rav Ovadia cites a celebrated ruling of Rav Kook (Teshuvot Mishpat Kohen 144:14) who rules that:
When a king does not reign in Israel, all the rules of a king regarding the public needs of the residents of Eretz Yisrael revert to the nation that resides within it and to the government chosen by that nation.
Dina d’malchuta Dina in a Government Composed of Many Non-Observant Jews
Rav Ovadia notes that there are some who wish to argue dina d’malchuta dina does not apply to the Israeli government because many of its members are Jews who do not observe Torah, and some even are against Torah observance. Rav Yosef swiftly responds by noting that Tosafot (Sanhedrin 20b s.v. Melech Muttar) and the Zohar (parashat Vayeishev) rule that dina d’malchuta dina applies even to an evil king such as Achav.
Indeed, at a 2008 convention, leading Religious Zionist rabbinic court judges (who arbitrate monetary disputes) confirmed that dina d’malchuta dina applies in the State of Israel. In a joint statement (published in Techumin 29:144) signed by luminaries such as Rav Yaakov Ariel and Rav Dov Lior, they cited as proof to this assertion, in addition to the aforementioned responsum of Rav Ovadia Yosef, rulings of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Teshuvot Minchat Shlomo 1:87), Rav Eliezer Waldenberg (Teshuvot Tzitz Eliezer 4:28) and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Techumin 3:242).
In this statement, they cited yet another reason to uphold civil laws. Teshuvot Chatam Sofer (C.M. 44) confirms the halachic validity of civil laws which “we too would have instituted, had the situation come before us.” The joint statement specifically mentions the distance automobiles must observe between each other while driving as an example of such a law.
Dina d’Malchuta Dina in the United States
Based on the above discussion, it is obvious that dina d’malchuta dina undoubtedly applies in the United States. Indeed, Rav Hershel Schachter (Nefesh Harav p. 269) records the following about Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik:
Our master was very scrupulous about paying government taxes, and I heard in Rav Soloveitchik’s name that if one has specific knowledge that a particular store does not pay sales taxes to the government, it is forbidden to make purchases there, as it violates Lifnei Iveir (the prohibition to cause others to sin).
I have similarly heard that an organization devoted to reaching out to less observant youngsters once asked Rav Soloveitchik if it was permitted to retain staff and not pay them “on the books” (i.e., pay them in cash to avoid taxes). Rav Soloveichik replied that it is forbidden. The organization told Rav Soloveitchik that it would not have sufficient funds to operate the office if it were to pay its staff “on the books.” Rav Soloveitchik responded that if that was the case, it should close the office, despite its noble work. Rav Moshe Feinstein also rules that dina d’malchuta dina applies in the United States, as is evident from many of his teshuvot (Teshuvot Igrot Moshe C.M. 1:88, in which he specifically rules that one must pay taxes, as well as C.M. 2:29, 2:30 and 2:55). He writes the following in a responsum in which he forbids defrauding the United States government (which he calls a “government of kindness”) to receive more student aid than one deserves (Teshuvot Igrot Moshe C.M. 2:29):
There exists no manner in which to proclaim such behavior as permissible. Just as Hashem hates sacrifices offered from theft, Hashem hates support of Torah and those who study Torah by means of theft.…The Roshei Yeshivot and directors, who are God-fearing individuals, are not, God forbid, suspected of violating the prohibitions of theft, lying, deception and violation of Dina D’malchuta Dina by any possible proclamation of permissibility because they are aware that this severe sin brings heavenly punishments, in this world and in the next, and contravenes the very purpose of the establishment of Yeshivot – for the students to develop into authentic God-fearing individuals who are exceptionally careful to refrain from any prohibitions regarding financial matters.
Some argue that dina d’malchuta dina does not apply in the United States because of some corrupt politicians and some laws which one might regard as unjust. I have heard Rav Hershel Schachter respond to this argument by noting that Shmuel declared this principle to apply to the Babylonian government of his time, which was hardly perfect. Similarly, dina d’malchuta dina applies to the United States and other decent governments, despite the fact that these governments are less than perfect. Shmuel’s application of this rule to the government of his time proves that this rule applies to any reasonably decent government, even if these govements are imperfect.
Acting as Productive and Law-Abiding Citizens of our Host Countries
Yirmiyahu (29:5-7) prepares us for exile by teaching us to build homes, to marry and to pray and act for the benefit of the city in which we reside. The principle of dina d’malchuta dina certainly is in harmony with Yirmiyahu’s teaching. It also fits with the teaching of Chazal (cited in Rashi to Bemidbar 20:17) that a guest must benefit his host. Strict adherence to dina d’malchuta dina helps insure that we benefit the country in which we reside.
Conclusion
It is shameful and disgraceful to disregard the Halachah of dina d’malchuta dina both in Israel and in the United States (and in any other just jurisdiction). In the words of Rav Moshe Feinstein (ibid.), “Besides the prohibitions of theft, there are other terrible sins involved, including lying, deceiving, creating Chillul Hashem (desecration of God’s name) and disgracing Torah and those who study it…and this sin also causes great harm to the great Torah scholars and their students who scrupulously avoid any trace of concern for theft and the like (by ruining their reputations).” In recent decades, many Jews have become exceptionally meticulous about Halachot such as kashrut and Shabbat, even beyond what the letter of the law requires. May we also be fastidiously observant of dina d’malchuta dina, which constitutes a Torah-level obligation according to the Chatam Sofer and Rav Ovadia Yosef.