I need a reply to the discussion below.the reply must be at least 200 words. Do not just say good job or I learned something from your post. Replies are not a cheering exercise. Instead, your replies must be substantial, reflecting what you learned from reading the post, offering an extension, or correcting a mistake. Use what you learned in researching for your post (or knowledge gained from other classes or personal experience) to either supplement or critique the post you are writing about.From the perspective of minimizing taxes and the Christian worldview, I believe Romans 13:7 is important to study, Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed (Romans 13:7, ESV, 2021). On the surface, this verse seems to suggest that Christians should pay the taxes owed and not try to minimize what is due. I however view this verse with a slightly different analysis. Paying what is owed implies to me that we should do all that is possible to not pay more in taxes than what is owed. As long as we, as Christians, are acting within good faith and not lying to the government about tax deductions, then I see no problems with reducing tax liabilities to the lowest legally allowable.Ultimately, Christians should view the ownership of money as a stewardship for the Lord. As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of Gods varied grace (1 Peter 4:10, ESV, 2021). Being a steward for the Lord and viewing all worldly possessions, such as money, as His first and foremost, also gives confidence in reducing taxes as a good thing. If Christians reduce their taxes for the purpose of hording, then they are not serving as a good steward. Instead, a Christian should reduce taxes for the purpose of giving more and spreading some of the saved wealth.I think of limiting liabilities from the same perspective as that of saving taxes. Christians must focus on protecting themselves so that a portion of their wealth, which is being stewarded for the Lord, does not fall into malicious hands. I believe that using a business structure to limit liabilities is not done so that the business owner can act inappropriately, but instead to protect the business owner from the inappropriate actions of patrons or other community members. The formation of a limited liability company is for self-protection. When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are safe (Luke 11:21, ESV, 2021). Business owners arm themselves through legal structures like limited liability companies.In the cases where a business owner, Christian or not, does act with malice intent, a limited liability company may not provide personal protection. If an owner commits negligence or does not follow incorporation procedure, his own assets can be subject to seizure if the company is sued (Morley, 2016). Just having a limited liability company is not a green light for inappropriate actions by the business owner. This alone proves that a limited liability structure should not be seen as an immoral act, but instead should be viewed as an act of self-protection.I would lastly express to Frank that I believe he is viewing both the structure of the business and of taxation of the business as if he has done something inappropriate or negligent. Instead, I would encourage Frank to think of both issues from the perspective of his customers, his vendors, or even the government doing something inappropriate or negligent. This perspective should foster confidence that being a good steward for the Lord actual makes limiting taxes and liabilities a necessity not an advantage.