A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 17 Jan 2017, 21:34

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 240
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 205 [1] , given: 8

A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2011, 11:50
1
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

54% (02:28) correct 46% (01:33) wrong based on 239 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to consumers who purchase a newly constructed home. The tax credit was intended to stimulate the local economy by creating a higher demand for new houses and spurring the creation of jobs in construction and design. However, since the law was passed, the growth in sales of newly constructed homes has dropped each year, from 15% to 10% to 5%. Obviously, this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes.

Which of the following must be true if the above conclusion is to be properly drawn?

New house sales are directly tied to personal income.
New house sales cannot increase by more than 6% next year.
If the tax credit had been 50%, there would have been a larger increase in new house sales
Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.
Tax credits for specific purchases are usually ineffective in influencing consumers to make those purchases.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 565
Followers: 18

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 13

Re: CR - Assumption 700 level [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2011, 12:14
bschool83 wrote:
A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to consumers who purchase a newly constructed home. The tax credit was intended to stimulate the local economy by creating a higher demand for new houses and spurring the creation of jobs in construction and design. However, since the law was passed, the growth in sales of newly constructed homes has dropped each year, from 15% to 10% to 5%. Obviously, this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes.

Which of the following must be true if the above conclusion is to be properly drawn?

New house sales are directly tied to personal income.
New house sales cannot increase by more than 6% next year.
If the tax credit had been 50%, there would have been a larger increase in new house sales
Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.
Tax credits for specific purchases are usually ineffective in influencing consumers to make those purchases.

D it is
we need an answer that says the drop wouldn't have been even worse without the tax credit
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 299
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V40
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 48 [1] , given: 7

Re: CR - Assumption 700 level [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2011, 06:21
1
KUDOS
I say D. The author is assuming that without the tax credit, the sales would have been similar, not worse than the sales figure now.
_________________

If you like my post, consider giving me KUDOS!

Manager
Joined: 14 Feb 2010
Posts: 161
Location: Banaglore
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 8

Re: CR - Assumption 700 level [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2011, 23:53
Can some one please explain why E is incorrect?
Intern
Status: Applying in Round 2
Joined: 17 Mar 2011
Posts: 23
Concentration: Finance, Accounting
Schools: Stern '14
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [1] , given: 28

Re: CR - Assumption 700 level [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2011, 21:22
1
KUDOS
A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to consumers who purchase a newly constructed home. The tax credit was intended to stimulate the local economy by creating a higher demand for new houses and spurring the creation of jobs in construction and design. However, since the law was passed, the growth in sales of newly constructed homes has dropped each year, from 15% to 10% to 5%. Obviously, this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes.

Which of the following must be true if the above conclusion is to be properly drawn?

New house sales are directly tied to personal income.
New house sales cannot increase by more than 6% next year.
If the tax credit had been 50%, there would have been a larger increase in new house sales
Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.
[b]Addresses the conclusion assuming that decrease would not have been sharp if this was not the case
Tax credits for specific purchases are usually ineffective in influencing consumers to make those purchases.

Intern
Joined: 06 Jul 2011
Posts: 28
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Assumption 700 level [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2011, 21:43
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
zuberahmed wrote:
Can some one please explain why E is incorrect?

E - Tax credits for specific purchases are usually ineffective in influencing consumers to make those purchases.
If we negate, tax credits are usually effective in influencing consumers. It doesn't hurt the argument. Key word here is usually. In reality, it's neither here nor there (is that a GMAT SC-type correct idiom? I haven't gotten there yet hehe). Sure, tax credits are usually effective, but maybe here they are or are not.

D- Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.
If we negate, new house sales would be significantly lower without the tax credit. The argument breaks down and the law has an equally significant effect. Thus, this is the correct answer. It must be true if the above conclusion is to be properly drawn.

_________________

GMAT Day: Nov. 19, 2011

Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 397
Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V32
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 13

Re: CR - Assumption 700 level [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jul 2011, 00:57
zuberahmed wrote:
Can some one please explain why E is incorrect?

Tax credits for specific purchases are usually ineffective in influencing consumers to make those purchases.

This statement has no bearing on the conclusion which is : Obviously, this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes.

But I believe if the assumption was :Tax credits for specific purchases are usually effective in influencing consumers to make those purchases. It might be an assumption, because if you negate it, the argument may fail if change effective back to ineffective.

My answer was D as well.
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2011
Posts: 268
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 454 [0], given: 13

Re: CR - Assumption 700 level [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jul 2011, 12:43
I chose E as well...stupid assumption questions lol. Whats the source?
_________________

Powerscore CR Bible Full Chapter Notes | Easily Extend Vocabulary List with Google Dictionary

Please kudo me if you found my post useful. Thanks!!!

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10529
Followers: 918

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2014, 07:01
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Chat Moderator
Joined: 04 Aug 2016
Posts: 216
GPA: 4
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 83

Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2016, 08:29
I did not follow the explanation provided. Can someone break it down please?
Math Forum Moderator
Status: QA & VA Forum Moderator
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 2301
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
Followers: 92

Kudos [?]: 633 [1] , given: 317

Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2016, 12:18
1
KUDOS
warriorguy wrote:
I did not follow the explanation provided. Can someone break it down please?

Let's try -

Quote:
A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to consumers who purchase a newly constructed home. The tax credit was intended to stimulate the local economy by creating a higher demand for new houses and spurring the creation of jobs in construction and design.

30% Tax credit for purchase of new House --------> Stimulating demand for new House ----> Creation of contract jobs.
|------------------------(A)------------------------------->-------------------(B)----------------------->-----------(C)----------------|

Quote:
However, since the law was passed, the growth in sales of newly constructed homes has dropped each year, from 15% to 10% to 5%. Obviously, this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes.

30% Tax credit for purchase of new House <--------- Demand for new House dropped
|------------------------(~A)---------------------------<-------------------(~B)----------------|

Check the negation logic used in the stimulus ( as depicted above) , hope this helps...

_________________

Thanks and Regards

Abhishek....

PLEASE FOLLOW THE RULES FOR POSTING IN QA AND VA FORUM AND USE SEARCH FUNCTION BEFORE POSTING NEW QUESTIONS

How to use Search Function in GMAT Club | Rules for Posting in QA forum | Writing Mathematical Formulas |Rules for Posting in VA forum | Request Expert's Reply ( VA Forum Only )

Manager
Joined: 24 Jul 2016
Posts: 97
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 5

Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2016, 12:49
I chose D, was confused between D and E

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
_________________

Kaplan CAT#1 660 (Q50, V 33)
GMATPrep CAT#1 590 (Q 49, V 28)
Veritas CAT#1 640 (Q 47, V 31)
Veritas CAT#2 620 (Q 46, V 30)
Veritas CAT#3 680 (Q 50, V 34)
Veritas CAT#4 650 (Q 49, V 31)
Princeton Review CAT#1 650 (Q 44, V 36)
Kaplan CAT2 720 (Q49, V40)- got some questions in other tests already
Veritas CAT#5 680
Kaplan CAT#3 710
Target GMAT 720

Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax   [#permalink] 21 Sep 2016, 12:49
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
18 The Fieldpark nuclear power plant, cited three years ago by a 6 03 Sep 2015, 06:03
5 Ten years ago, the Salisbury City Council passed the Culinary Bill, ne 8 09 Jun 2015, 11:58
2 A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax 7 19 Oct 2012, 09:47
A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax 8 28 Aug 2009, 08:00
Under current federal law, employers are allowed to offer 0 26 Jul 2007, 15:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.