If I DON'T brake the law, do I become a moral person?

Many (false) arguments have been used to justify 'tax', i.e. the power of the State to forcefully demand a certain part of the individuals' property (for whatever reason). One of the most common arguments for taxation in the so-called "welfare" societies is the "distribution of the common burdens" of society, most notable the funding of the "rich" of education, health care and support for the poor so that a certain "equality" in lifestyles can be obtained. By soaking the rich, it can be guaranteed that "equal access" is to education´and health care and that everyone is insured a certain minimum income.

Fair enough I say. This attempt to obtain "equality" is a goal in itself, and those who rule the State can choose this goal or any other and wield the State to reach it. Hitler used the State to enslave and slaughter millions of people. The Social democrats use the State to soak the rich and distribute their property to other groups in society. Both goals are in themselves only different in their type of violation of individual rights - one takes the life of individuals away from them, the other robs individuals of their property.

The problem with these promoters of State-enforced equality is their self-declared moral stance. They claim that they are using the State to reach a moral goal - equality of income and "opportunities". The Social democrats would never accept my definition of them as violators of individual rights, different only from Hitler in the kind of violation they engage in with the use of the State. No, the Social democrats will say that tax is a necessary good (or evil) to obtain a moral goal, and it is therefore justifiable.

But now for the tricky part. Lets say that equality really is a moral goal. How is it moral to obtain it with force? If it is a moral action to donate money to the poor, how is a person moral for being forced to do it? Isn't a goal only morally reached if a person does so by his or her own free will? By demonstrating a free will to be moral. Or is a monkey a moral animal if I force it to bring food to the homeless?

The very morality of giving to the poor disappears as soon as force is used to make people give to the poor. The welfare society may very well have a moral objective (although I am not convinced about that), but the very existence of it (and its tax-forced funding of its "moral" actions) wipes all morality away from it, and replaces with force and violation of individual rights, which are very doubtful moral attributes of a society.