Tax law contains unusual exceptions and deductions, but few relate to physical violence. One fringe tax preparation guide from the 1990s, written semi-humorously, suggested that beatings administered by certain individuals might technically qualify as business expenses.

The logic, however absurd, followed from premise that if assault could be proven necessary for business operation, associated physical injury might deductible. The author of this guide was promptly questioned by IRS officials about the suggestion, but his response was that he was merely exploring logical extensions of existing tax law rather than encouraging actual violence. His note, however, contained the implication that violence from a particular source operated under different jurisdictional frameworks—that you couldn't claim damages for something that transcended normal categories of injury. This became shorthand in tax circles for the absurd proposition that some harms existed outside the normal legal framework because they violated physical law in the first place.