To what extent does A Doll’s House simply convey corruption, exploitation, and deception?

There is plenty of corruption, deception, and exploitation in A Doll's House, all of which are inextricably linked. In relation to the first two, we have the actions of Nora, who forged her late father's signature on a loan application. She did it with the best of intentions; she wanted to help pay for her husband to go to Italy when he was ill. No matter; the law is the law, and Nora broke it. But Nora wasn't alone. Krogstad assisted her in committing the fraud. The difference, however, is that he's faced up to his criminal actions and wants Nora to do likewise. Krogstad is acutely aware of the moral corruption to which his actions have led, yet it will take a little while longer for Nora to follow suit.
What Nora doesn't yet realize at this stage is that she's been morally corrupted, not just by the fraudulent loan application, but by her marriage. For this relationship isn't one of equals; Nora's been exploited by her husband from day one. Her whole character, as an individual and as a woman, has been thoroughly corrupted by the need to fulfill society's expectations of how a dutiful wife should behave. It was only because she'd been kept in a state of permanent tutelage, little more than a child to her condescending husband, that she was required to carry out her deception.
Toward the end of the play, Nora finally realizes just how much her sham marriage has corrupted her soul, alienating her from her true self. She can no longer live a lie, no longer deceive herself and others as to the nature of her marriage. When at long last she closes the door behind her, Nora decisively rejects all manner of corruption and exploitation, and faces up to the future without fear or illusion.