Skip to the content

Get A Quote

More Than AccountantsMore Than Accountants
  • Who We Help
    • Sole Trader Accounting
    • Small Business Accountants
    • Limited Company Accountants
    • Partnership
    • Limited Liability Partnerships
    • Contractor Accountants
    • Xero Accountants
  • Online Accountancy Services
    • Company Accounts
    • Tax Returns
    • VAT Returns
    • Bookkeeping Services
    • Financial Reports
    • Payroll Services
  • Knowledge
    • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Who We Help
    • Sole Trader Accounting
    • Limited Company Accountants
    • Partnership
    • Limited Liability Partnerships
    • Contractor Accountants
  • Online Accountancy Services
    • Company Accounts
    • Tax Returns
    • VAT Returns
    • Bookkeeping Services
    • Financial Reports
    • Payroll Services
  • Quote Online
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Categories
Industry News

The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits By Milton Friedman

  • Post author By James Duffy
  • Post date September 13, 2018
  • No Comments on The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits By Milton Friedman

 This First Published The New York Times Magazine, September 13, 1970 and is Copyright @ 1970 by The New York Times Company. It has been republished for the use of our accountancy students to see the change in Corporate Social Responsibility over the last 50 years.

When I hear businessmen speak eloquently about the “social responsibilities of business in a free-enterprise system,” I am reminded of the wonderful line about the Frenchman who discovered at the age of 70 that he had been speaking prose all his life. The businessmen believe that they are defending free en­terprise when they declaim that business is not concerned “merely” with profit but also with promoting desirable “social” ends; that business has a “social conscience” and takes seriously its responsibilities for providing em­ployment, eliminating discrimination, avoid­ing pollution and whatever else may be the catchwords of the contemporary crop of re­formers. In fact they are–or would be if they or anyone else took them seriously–preach­ing pure and unadulterated socialism. Busi­nessmen who talk this way are unwitting pup­pets of the intellectual forces that have been undermining the basis of a free society these past decades.

The discussions of the “social responsibili­ties of business” are notable for their analytical looseness and lack of rigor. What does it mean to say that “business” has responsibilities? Only people can have responsibilities. A corporation is an artificial person and in this sense may have artificial responsibilities, but “business” as a whole cannot be said to have responsibilities, even in this vague sense. The first step toward clarity in examining the doctrine of the social responsibility of business is to ask precisely what it implies for whom.

Presumably, the individuals who are to be responsible are businessmen, which means in­dividual proprietors or corporate executives. Most of the discussion of social responsibility is directed at corporations, so in what follows I shall mostly neglect the individual proprietors and speak of corporate executives.

In a free-enterprise, private-property sys­tem, a corporate executive is an employee of the owners of the business. He has direct re­sponsibility to his employers. That responsi­bility is to conduct the business in accordance with their desires, which generally will be to make as much money as possible while con­forming to the basic rules of the society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom. Of course, in some cases his employers may have a different objective. A group of persons might establish a corporation for an eleemosynary purpose for exam­ple, a hospital or a school. The manager of such a corporation will not have money profit as his objective but the rendering of certain services.

In either case, the key point is that, in his capacity as a corporate executive, the manager is the agent of the individuals who own the corporation or establish the eleemosynary institution, and his primary responsibility is to them.

Needless to say, this does not mean that it is easy to judge how well he is performing his task. But at least the criterion of performance is straightforward, and the persons among whom a voluntary contractual arrangement exists are clearly defined.

Of course, the corporate executive is also a person in his own right. As a person, he may have many other responsibilities that he rec­ognizes or assumes voluntarily–to his family, his conscience, his feelings of charity, his church, his clubs, his city, his country. He ma}. feel impelled by these responsibilities to de­vote part of his income to causes he regards as worthy, to refuse to work for particular corpo­rations, even to leave his job, for example, to join his country’s armed forces. Ifwe wish, we may refer to some of these responsibilities as “social responsibilities.” But in these respects he is acting as a principal, not an agent; he is spending his own money or time or energy, not the money of his employers or the time or energy he has contracted to devote to their purposes. If these are “social responsibili­ties,” they are the social responsibilities of in­dividuals, not of business.

What does it mean to say that the corpo­rate executive has a “social responsibility” in his capacity as businessman? If this statement is not pure rhetoric, it must mean that he is to act in some way that is not in the interest of his employers. For example, that he is to refrain from increasing the price of the product in order to contribute to the social objective of preventing inflation, even though a price in crease would be in the best interests of the corporation. Or that he is to make expendi­tures on reducing pollution beyond the amount that is in the best interests of the cor­poration or that is required by law in order to contribute to the social objective of improving the environment. Or that, at the expense of corporate profits, he is to hire “hardcore” un­employed instead of better qualified available workmen to contribute to the social objective of reducing poverty.

In each of these cases, the corporate exec­utive would be spending someone else’s money for a general social interest. Insofar as his actions in accord with his “social responsi­bility” reduce returns to stockholders, he is spending their money. Insofar as his actions raise the price to customers, he is spending the customers’ money. Insofar as his actions lower the wages of some employees, he is spending their money.

The stockholders or the customers or the employees could separately spend their own money on the particular action if they wished to do so. The executive is exercising a distinct “social responsibility,” rather than serving as an agent of the stockholders or the customers or the employees, only if he spends the money in a different way than they would have spent it.

But if he does this, he is in effect imposing taxes, on the one hand, and deciding how the tax proceeds shall be spent, on the other.

This process raises political questions on two levels: principle and consequences. On the level of political principle, the imposition of taxes and the expenditure of tax proceeds are gov­ernmental functions. We have established elab­orate constitutional, parliamentary and judicial provisions to control these functions, to assure that taxes are imposed so far as possible in ac­cordance with the preferences and desires of the public after all, “taxation without repre­sentation” was one of the battle cries of the American Revolution. We have a system of checks and balances to separate the legisla­tive function of imposing taxes and enacting expenditures from the executive function of collecting taxes and administering expendi­ture programs and from the judicial function of mediating disputes and interpreting the law.

Here the businessman–self-selected or appointed directly or indirectly by stockhold­ers–is to be simultaneously legislator, execu­tive and, jurist. He is to decide whom to tax by how much and for what purpose, and he is to spend the proceeds all this guided only by general exhortations from on high to restrain inflation, improve the environment, fight poverty and so on and on.

The whole justification for permitting the corporate executive to be selected by the stockholders is that the executive is an agent serving the interests of his principal. This jus­tification disappears when the corporate ex­ecutive imposes taxes and spends the pro­ceeds for “social” purposes. He becomes in effect a public employee, a civil servant, even though he remains in name an employee of a private enterprise. On grounds of political principle, it is intolerable that such civil ser­vants insofar as their actions in the name of social responsibility are real and not just win­dow-dressing should be selected as they are now. If they are to be civil servants, then they must be elected through a political process. If they are to impose taxes and make expendi­tures to foster “social” objectives, then politi­cal machinery must be set up to make the as­sessment of taxes and to determine through a political process the objectives to be served.

This is the basic reason why the doctrine of “social responsibility” involves the acceptance of the socialist view that political mechanisms, not market mechanisms, are the appropriate way to determine the allocation of scarce re­sources to alternative uses

On the grounds of consequences, can the corporate executive in fact discharge his al­leged “social responsibilities?” On the other hand, suppose he could get away with spending the stockholders’ or customers’ or employees’ money. How is he to know how to spend it? He is told that he must contribute to fighting inflation. How is he to know what ac­tion of his will contribute to that end? He is presumably an expert in running his company in producing a product or selling it or financing it. But nothing about his selection makes him an expert on inflation. Will his hold­ ing down the price of his product reduce infla­tionary pressure? Or, by leaving more spending power in the hands of his customers, simply divert it elsewhere? Or, by forcing him to produce less because of the lower price, will it simply contribute to shortages? Even if he could an­swer these questions, how much cost is he justi­fied in imposing on his stockholders, customers and employees for this social purpose? What is his appropriate share and what is the appropri­ate share of others?

And, whether he wants to or not, can he get away with spending his stockholders’, cus­tomers’ or employees’ money? Will not the stockholders fire him? (Either the present ones or those who take over when his actions in the name of social responsibility have re­duced the corporation’s profits and the price of its stock.) His customers and his employees can desert him for other producers and em­ployers less scrupulous in exercising their so­cial responsibilities.

This facet of “social responsibility” doc­ trine is brought into sharp relief when the doctrine is used to justify wage restraint by trade unions. The conflict of interest is naked and clear when union officials are asked to subordinate the interest of their members to some more general purpose. If the union offi­cials try to enforce wage restraint, the consequence is likely to be wildcat strikes, rank­-and-file revolts and the emergence of strong competitors for their jobs. We thus have the ironic phenomenon that union leaders at least in the U.S. have objected to Govern­ment interference with the market far more consistently and courageously than have business leaders.

The difficulty of exercising “social responsibility” illustrates, of course, the great virtue of private competitive enterprise it forces people to be responsible for their own actions and makes it difficult for them to “exploit” other people for either selfish or unselfish purposes. They can do good but only at their own expense.

Many a reader who has followed the argu­ment this far may be tempted to remonstrate that it is all well and good to speak of Government’s having the responsibility to im­pose taxes and determine expenditures for such “social” purposes as controlling pollu­tion or training the hard-core unemployed, but that the problems are too urgent to wait on the slow course of political processes, that the exercise of social responsibility by busi­nessmen is a quicker and surer way to solve pressing current problems.

Aside from the question of fact I share Adam Smith’s skepticism about the benefits that can be expected from “those who affected to trade for the public good” this argument must be rejected on grounds of principle. What it amounts to is an assertion that those who favor the taxes and expenditures in question have failed to persuade a majority of their fellow citizens to be of like mind and that they are seeking to attain by undemocratic procedures what they cannot attain by democratic proce­dures. In a free society, it is hard for “evil” people to do “evil,” especially since one man’s good is another’s evil.

I have, for simplicity, concentrated on the special case of the corporate executive, ex­cept only for the brief digression on trade unions. But precisely the same argument ap­plies to the newer phenomenon of calling upon stockholders to require corporations to exercise social responsibility (the recent G.M crusade for example). In most of these cases, what is in effect involved is some stockholders trying to get other stockholders (or customers or employees) to contribute against their will to “social” causes favored by the activists. In­sofar as they succeed, they are again imposing taxes and spending the proceeds.

The situation of the individual proprietor is somewhat different. If he acts to reduce the returns of his enterprise in order to exercise his “social responsibility,” he is spending his own money, not someone else’s. If he wishes to spend his money on such purposes, that is his right, and I cannot see that there is any ob­jection to his doing so. In the process, he, too, may impose costs on employees and cus­tomers. However, because he is far less likely than a large corporation or union to have mo­nopolistic power, any such side effects will tend to be minor.

Of course, in practice the doctrine of social responsibility is frequently a cloak for actions that are justified on other grounds rather than a reason for those actions.

To illustrate, it may well be in the long run interest of a corporation that is a major employer in a small community to devote resources to providing amenities to that community or to improving its government. That may make it easier to attract desirable employees, it may reduce the wage bill or lessen losses from pilferage and sabotage or have other worthwhile effects. Or it may be that, given the laws about the deductibility of corporate charitable contributions, the stockholders can contribute more to chari­ties they favor by having the corporation make the gift than by doing it themselves, since they can in that way contribute an amount that would otherwise have been paid as corporate taxes.

In each of these and many similar cases, there is a strong temptation to rationalize these actions as an exercise of “social responsibility.” In the present climate of opinion, with its wide spread aversion to “capitalism,” “profits,” the “soulless corporation” and so on, this is one way for a corporation to generate goodwill as a by-product of expenditures that are entirely justified in its own self-interest.

It would be inconsistent of me to call on corporate executives to refrain from this hyp­ocritical window-dressing because it harms the foundations of a free society. That would be to call on them to exercise a “social re­sponsibility”! If our institutions, and the atti­tudes of the public make it in their self-inter­est to cloak their actions in this way, I cannot summon much indignation to denounce them. At the same time, I can express admiration for those individual proprietors or owners of closely held corporations or stockholders of more broadly held corporations who disdain such tactics as approaching fraud.

Whether blameworthy or not, the use of the cloak of social responsibility, and the nonsense spoken in its name by influential and presti­gious businessmen, does clearly harm the foun­dations of a free society. I have been impressed time and again by the schizophrenic character of many businessmen. They are capable of being extremely farsighted and clearheaded in matters that are internal to their businesses. They are incredibly shortsighted and muddle­headed in matters that are outside their businesses but affect the possible survival of busi­ness in general. This shortsightedness is strikingly exemplified in the calls from many businessmen for wage and price guidelines or controls or income policies. There is nothing that could do more in a brief period to destroy a market system and replace it by a centrally con­trolled system than effective governmental con­trol of prices and wages.

The shortsightedness is also exemplified in speeches by businessmen on social respon­sibility. This may gain them kudos in the short run. But it helps to strengthen the already too prevalent view that the pursuit of profits is wicked and immoral and must be curbed and controlled by external forces. Once this view is adopted, the external forces that curb the market will not be the social consciences, however highly developed, of the pontificating executives; it will be the iron fist of Government bureaucrats. Here, as with price and wage controls, businessmen seem to me to reveal a suicidal impulse.

The political principle that underlies the market mechanism is unanimity. In an ideal free market resting on private property, no individual can coerce any other, all coopera­tion is voluntary, all parties to such coopera­tion benefit or they need not participate. There are no values, no “social” responsibilities in any sense other than the shared values and responsibilities of individuals. Society is a collection of individuals and of the various groups they voluntarily form.

The political principle that underlies the political mechanism is conformity. The indi­vidual must serve a more general social inter­est whether that be determined by a church or a dictator or a majority. The individual may have a vote and say in what is to be done, but if he is overruled, he must conform. It is appropriate for some to require others to contribute to a general social purpose whether they wish to or not.

Unfortunately, unanimity is not always feasi­ble. There are some respects in which conformity appears unavoidable, so I do not see how one can avoid the use of the political mecha­nism altogether.

But the doctrine of “social responsibility” taken seriously would extend the scope of the political mechanism to every human activity. It does not differ in philosophy from the most explicitly collectivist doctrine. It differs only by professing to believe that collectivist ends can be attained without collectivist means. That is why, in my book Capitalism and Freedom, I have called it a “fundamentally subversive doctrine” in a free society, and have said that in such a society, “there is one and only one social responsibility of business to use it resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.”.

For more guides like this, visit our online accountants page for the latest news.

Share this post

By James Duffy

James is the co founder of More Than Accountants an Online Accountants. He will be more than happy to help More Than Accountants clients implement any guides or strategies that he has posted to the blog. If you would like to learn more about becoming a More Than Accountants client you can quote online by using our Unlimited Accountancy Services Quoting Tool.

View Archive →

← The Xero Dashboard: All Your Accounting in One Place → Chocolate Bar Illustrates the Complexities of VAT

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

By James Duffy

James is the co founder of More Than Accountants an Online Accountants. He will be more than happy to help More Than Accountants clients implement any guides or strategies that he has posted to the blog. If you would like to learn more about becoming a More Than Accountants client you can quote online by using our Unlimited Accountancy Services Quoting Tool.

View Archive →
  • 0161 804 0808
  • Get An Online Quote

EXCELLENT
Based on 214 reviews
Google
Kai W
Kai W
2025-02-12
Excellent accounting service! Very professional and quick at answering my queries. I really enjoy working with them.
Kandice Morris
Kandice Morris
2025-01-30
I cannot recommend More than Accountants highly enough! From the first meeting, I was impressed by their professionalism, knowledge, and dedication to helping clients succeed. They took the time to understand my financial situation and goals, and they provided tailored advice that has significantly impacted my financial health. Their attention to detail is truly commendable. I have always felt confident knowing that my accounts are managed with the utmost precision. Not only did my accountant (Hasrat ) do my taxes promptly, but he also got me a refund!! More than accountants are always available to answer questions and respond quickly, making what could be a stressful process quite manageable. I’m incredibly grateful for their guidance and support, and I look forward to many years of continued collaboration!
Misha Cunningham
Misha Cunningham
2025-01-30
After a bit of a rocky start with this accountants, they now deal with all 4 of my active companies. And, the major contributing factor in this is the excellent care and attention that I receive from Arshiya. I actually insisted that she be kept as my main point of contact in my dealings with More than Accountants and I feel extremely looked after. On another note, their unlimited package is quite expensive, but in my eyes it's worth it as they handle everything, meaning I don't have to worry about anything. Plus, I know if I need anything in the interim it's simply covered in the fees already without needing to fork out extra here and there.
Brian Roache
Brian Roache
2025-01-20
More than accountants have provided an affordable accountancy service to my limited company Reveldrive Limited and dealt with all the formal tax returns and my personal tax. Hasrat has been my contact during the years with them and knows his subject very well.
Henry Dean
Henry Dean
2025-01-13
Wonderful, friendly and talented accountants. They make running my limited company a breeze. I can always rely on them to respond straight away. My accountant Aqsa is a star!
James Brennan
James Brennan
2025-01-13
Waleed, Arshiya and the rest of the team at More Than have been handling our accounts & carrying out payroll duties since March 2024. Since then they have provided the very best service possible, every task they have carried out for the company has been totally faultless and stress free. The attention to detail in assisting the company in the best way possible is highly appreciated and we would recommend them to all companies seeking a professional accountant company
Jade Moon
Jade Moon
2025-01-03
Great accountancy firm. The team are super responsive, nothing is too much trouble and they support small business owners really well.
Cedric PISTOL
Cedric PISTOL
2024-12-31
Very pleased with the support provided by Atif Mahmood & Abdul Moiz, thank you for your patience and your prompt actions!
Stephen Bond
Stephen Bond
2024-12-24
Highly recommended, Waleed is so personal and helpful in all questions asked we started 2 years ago with MTA and together improving year on year.

Company

  • Our Approach
  • Quote Online
  • Contact Us

About the blog

The blog posts are brought to you by More Than Accountants employees and we occasionally allow guest posts that we think could benefit our customer base.

Feel free to contact the poster of the blog for help interpreting or implementing their posts..

Categories

  • Accountancy News
  • Accountancy Software
  • Announcements
  • Business Funding
  • Business Practice
  • Business Tools and Process Automation
  • Company News
  • Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Industry News
  • Marketing
  • Uncategorised

Recent Posts

  • Bookkeeping for Beginners: 9 Basic Concepts to Get You Started
  • Bookkeeping Packages Guide
  • What is Double Entry Bookkeeping?
  • Difference Between Accounting and Bookkeeping
  • Xero Training (Talk About How, etc.)

Recent Posts

  • Bookkeeping for Beginners: 9 Basic Concepts to Get You Started
  • Bookkeeping Packages Guide
  • What is Double Entry Bookkeeping?
  • Difference Between Accounting and Bookkeeping
  • Xero Training (Talk About How, etc.)

More Than Accountants is a national online/telephone based accountant.

Head Office
More Than Accountants
Burnden House,
Viking Street, Bolton
Lancashire, BL3 2RR

Telephone:
0161 804 0808

[mnky_list_item icon_fontawesome="fa fa-phone" last_item="last" icon_color="#eeee22"]202-555-0120[/mnky_list_item]
[mnky_list_item icon_fontawesome="fa fa-map-marker" last_item="last" icon_color="#eeee22"]4982 Parkway Street, Los Angeles, CA 90017 [/mnky_list_item]
[mnky_list_item icon_fontawesome="fa fa-clock-o" last_item="last" icon_color="#eeee22"]8AM - 5PM Weekdays[/mnky_list_item]
© 2021 More Than Accountants Limited More Than Accountants is a limited company registered in England under company number 09974015. Our companies house registered office is: More Than Accountants, Burnden House, Viking Street, BL3 2RR. Content is for general information only. Always take advice. FacebookTwitter

Resources

Knowledge Base

How Much Does an Accountant Cost

What is UTR Number and How to Find It

Sole Trader or Limited Company

Bookkeeping Services

Daniel James Tax

Sitemap

Recent Blog Posts

  • Bookkeeping for Beginners: 9 Basic Concepts to Get You Started
  • Bookkeeping Packages Guide
  • What is Double Entry Bookkeeping?

Site

  • Who We Help
    • Sole Traders
    • Limited Companies
    • Partnerships
    • Limited Liability Partnerships
    • Contractors
  • Our Services
    • Company Accounts
    • Tax Returns
    • VAT Returns
    • Bookkeeping Services
    • Payroll Services
  • Contact Us
  • 0161 804 0808
  • info@morethanaccountants.co.uk

Registered office :
Nautica House, Ground Floor,
Waters Meeting Road, Bolton,
Lancashire, BL1 8SW

0161 804 0808
info@morethanaccountants.co.uk

Who We Help

  • Sole Traders
  • Limited Companies
  • Partnerships
  • Limited Liability Partnerships
  • Contractor Accountants
  • Small Business Accountants
  • Xero Accountants
Linkedin Youtube Facebook

Services

  • Company Accounts
  • Tax Returns
  • VAT Returns
  • Bookkeeping Services
  • Financial/Management Reports
  • Payroll Services

Resources

  • Knowledge Base
  • Blog
  • Quoting Tool
  • Accountancy News
  • Accountancy Software
  • Business Funding
  • Business Practice
  • Business Tools and Process Automation
  • Company News
  • Customer Relationship Management CRM
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Industry News
  • Marketing
  • FuturePay Terms And Conditions

Recent Blog Posts

Recent Posts
  • Bookkeeping for Beginners: 9 Basic Concepts to Get You Started
  • Bookkeeping Packages Guide
  • What is Double Entry Bookkeeping?
  • Difference Between Accounting and Bookkeeping
  • Xero Training (Talk About How, etc.)

©  2025 More Than Accountants Limited 

More Than Accountants is a limited company registered in England under company number 09974015.
Content is for general information only. Always take advice.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
Cookie SettingsAccept All
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT