Goodin, RobertPasternak, Avia2016-10-192016-10-191470-594Xhttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/109343Some believe that the mere beneficiaries of wrongdoing of others ought to disgorge their tainted benefits. Others deny that claim. Both sides of this debate concentrate on unavoidable beneficiaries of the wrongdoing of others, who are presumed themselves to be innocent by virtue of the fact they have neither contributed to the wrong nor could they have avoided receiving the benefit. But as we show, this presumption is mistaken for unavoidable beneficiaries who intend in certain ways to benefit from wrongdoing, and who have therefore done something wrong in forming and acting on such an intention.Australian Research Council DP110100175.© The Author(s) 2016. http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/issn/1470-594X/..."Author's post-print on author's personal website, departmental website, institutional website or institutional repository" from SHERPA/RoMEO site (as at 20/10/16).Benefiting from Wrongdoing2016-06-2210.1177/1470594X16653624