I completely disagree, on several levels.
1) I'm allowed to give out extra gold based on character classes. If I start passing out 50 gold to each Warrior on every tax period, and then stop giving one of them the gold after they switch to priest, is that illegal? After all, I'm now penalizing that guy for no longer being a warrior.
That is ceasing actively rewarding, which, while it may have the same economic effect, is a qualitatively different thing than actively punishing.
Neither the game rules nor the IRs have changed since then.
I will admit that I cannot recall at precisely what time the tax system was first changed away from communism to something more region-based, but I believe that it was around the same time that the IRs were first enumerated. (This would have been in 2005-ish, when the Titan system was first established.) Even if the tax system changed a year or two later, the old system's
creation considerably predates the IRs, and I don't think it's at all unfair to say that it would have been designed quite differently if the IRs had been in force at the time of its creation.
4) What your combination of answers does is create entitlements out of bonuses and generosity. You have stated that it's OK to be generous toward specific classes, but that once you start being generous, that generosity turns into an entitlement that cannot be withdrawn under threat of OOC punishment.
If the bonus is given through a specific action on your part, then withdrawing it merely requires you not to act. You not giving a bonus is not the same as you giving a punishment.
If the bonus is given by you flipping a switch, then withdrawing it requires you to act. You actively revoking a generous stipend is an act of punishment.
So yes, if you give someone a generous estate
because they are an infiltrator, then you cannot revoke their estate, or demand, request, or insinuate that they should leave the estate once they have left the infiltrator subclass. To do so would be breaking the class IR, in my view.
