skirting

Uber relies on skirting regulation, as well as misdirecting their employees of what the risks truly are.

There is a large fine per call because robocallers are relentless at skirting and flat out breaking the law.

Companies on the other hand, especially those prone to skirting or breaking laws intentionally, come and go.

Uber has built its business skirting the laws on taxis and other transportation companies-- exploiting a loophole.

Someone made a reddit article outlining how to do this and the profit margin depended on skirting the 1099 rules.

My rent is $2600, i.e my unit is skirting just above the rent control line.

They're just skirting the law and are not completely legal nor right in every market.

If they were actually doing this, they were skirting the edge of the law.

To answer your second question, your app could be shut down at any time if Apple finds out you are skirting their system.

Not considering employees as employees, refusing to pay benefits, skirting around labor laws?

Business models that rely on skirting regulations affecting competitors are probably not sustainable.

Remittance - Has potential but all the companies so far are basically saving money by skirting money transfer laws and using other peoples services.

I believe you're on the right track, but the underlying problem of corruption - at any time, any person trusted to use their position of power as they're "supposed to" instead of skirting their limitations or trying to find ways around them - still exists in the system you described.

That's not the case here, though; it's instead a case of "hey, you should donate to this guy because the company you work for wants to donate $50k but can't because of legal restrictions, and this guy's been really good to us", which - legal or not - is (in my opinion at least) morally deplorable and certainly skirting around the intent of the existing law.