Moral philosophers have often grappled with defining rights and duties without looking to the overall consequences of certain rules. The leading defender of that position is Immanuel Kant, whose moral theory talks about how to universalize given norms without regard to their consequences. In this essay I claim that the Kantian standards are met at the macro level by the general system of welfare economics that relies on either Paretian or Kaldor-Hicks measures of social welfare that in turn support competitive, rather than monopolistic, institutions. I then argue that the same approach applies to conduct such as killing, lying, and breaking promises, which are all better understood in the same general framework used to establish and defend the characteristic features of both legal and moral obligations. Finally, this theory explains why obligations of beneficence are rightly regarded as imperfect.
Epstein, Richard A, Smart Consequentialism: Kantian Moral Theory and the (Qualified) Defense of Capitalism (January 1, 2014).