The Challenge of Wealth
By Rabbi Dr. Meir Tamari
RESPONSA-Vayigash.
Withholding Information from a Non-Jewish Client
QUESTION
"May I sell my used car to a non-Jew, knowing there is a defect but that
the buyer does not know that at the time of the sale?"
ANSWER
"If the seller assures the buyer that there are no defects and the buyer
relies on his word, then assuredly it is forbidden. To cause a non-Jew
[even an Akum, an idolator] to err is forbidden as geneivat da'at, [lit. to
steal another's mind](Hullin, 94; Choshen Mishpat, section 228; and Rambam,
Hilkot Mechirah, chapter 18, halakhot 1-3).
If the sale is made 'as is', without any undertaking or promises or
guarantees as to the absence of defects ['let the buyer beware'], then if
there is no chance that there will be a hillul Hashem, desecration of
G-d's Name, as could happen if the buyer later found out that the seller
knew of the defect at the time of the sale, we have to consider the opinion
of the Rama that it would be permissible (gloss on the Shulchan
Arukh,Choshen Mishpat, section 248, sub- section 2). Great care should be
taken to avoid any desecration of His Name". (Meishiv Kehalakhah, section 14).
Free market economists assume that the knowledge and information regarding
the nature and quality of the goods transacted, are equally available to
buyer and seller, so that all that is required for ethical markets is the
due diligence of both parties. In real life, that seldom is true as the
seller almost always has better knowledge than the buyer, so that merely
relying on caveat emptor may result in injustice. Halakhah insists on the
obligation of full disclosure as the basis for markets. This dealt with in
the concept of 'mekach taut' or faulty sale. One may not sell to another
goods or services that are defective in quality, nor may one cover up these
defects; rather, one is obligated to make full disclosure of any defect in
the goods or services sold. The existence of a warranty or guarantee is
automatically implied and the lack of these is assumed to be a scribe's
error. The buyer cannot be forced to accept a discount as compensation for
the defect. It should be noted that there does not have to be any attempt
to defraud; even where the seller was ignorant of the flaw, the sale may be
cancelled.
There is nothing immoral about presenting the goods or services we are
selling, in the best possible light. To that end we may advertise and
package them as we see fit. Advertising serves an additional positive
purpose, in that it enables buyers and sellers to operate with the best
knowledge of prices, quality and availability of goods and services, and
therefore make the best decisions possible. The ethical dilemma is
concerned with the truth of our presentation and our responsum deals, in
addition to the question of defective goods as such, with the truth
required in the presentation or advertising of the goods offered and the
impression they create. The key to this subject is the concept of geneivat
da'at, that is a category of fraud and theft (Choshen Mishpat, section 228,
subsection 6). The example given in the sources of geneivat da'at, is
selling to a gentile, non-kosher meat under the impression that it is
kosher. The gentiles are made to believe that the seller is doing something
special or beneficial for them, while actually no such thing is done. It
should be noted that there is no issue of the buyer suffering any harm or
damage from this sale, since the non-Jew is not required to eat kosher
food. Nevertheless, the seller did something wrong and we are always as
concerned with the spiritual harm done to the perpetrator, no less than any
damage suffered by the other party.
The Shulchan Arukh, in dealing with the laws of theft, first legislates
against blatant fraud, such as putting the good fruit on top, which is
tantamount to false advertising. It then continues to legislate against
misrepresentations.
"One is forbidden to beautify the article being sold in order to create a
false impression. So one is forbidden to give an animal
bran to drink that makes her hair brown and upright, thus creating the
impression that she is fat and sleek. Nor may one comb its hair artfully in
order to create the same false impression. One is not allowed to paint old
baskets to make them look new." (Hilkhot Geneivah, section 358)
The examples given in the Shulchan Arukh should not mislead us into
overlooking many similar practices in modern business. Financial reporting
that changes the rate of profits by changing methods of calculating
inventory or by bringing forward or postponing expenses, and the window
dressing of balance sheets and profit and loss statements, are simply
repainting old cracked baskets. The Hebrew expression for these practices,
'to beautify,' is more explicit. A corporation offering its shares to the
public may include a temporary infusion of capital to make a sick entity
look healthy, just like the cow in the Shuchan Arukh. We can all think of
how writing a c.v. may easily become like combing the hair of an old horse.
Copyright © 2003 by Rabbi Dr. Meir Tamari and Torah.org.
Rabbi Dr. Tamari is a renowned economist, Jewish scholar, and founder of the Center For Business Ethics (www.besr.org) in Jerusalem.