Giselle: The government needs to ensure that the public consumes less petroleum. When things cost more, people buy and use less of them. Therefore, the government should raise the sales tax on gasoline, a major petroleum product.
Antoine: The government should not raise the sales tax on gasoline. Such an increase would be unfair to gasoline users. If taxes are to be increased, the increases should be applied in such a way that they spread the burden of providing the government with increased revenues among many people, not just the users of gasoline.
As a rebuttal of Giselle’s argument, Antoine’s response is ineffective because(A) he ignores the fact that Giselle does not base her argument for raising the gasoline sales tax on the government’s need for increase revenues
(B) he fails to specify how many taxpayers there are who are not gasoline users
(C) his conclusion is based on an assertion regarding unfairness, and unfairness is a very subjective concept
(D) he mistakenly assumes that Giselle wants a sales tax increase only on gasoline
(E) he makes the implausible assumption that the burden of increasing government revenues can be more evenly distributed among the people through other means besides increasing the gasoline sales tax
Source: Nova GMAT
Difficulty Level: 600
The argument commits the true-but-irrelevant fallacy. In this context, it is often called the straw-man fallacy. Instead of addressing Giselle's statement, Antoine sets up a statement that Giselle did not make and then attacks that straw-man. Arguing with someone who employs this tactic can be quite infuriating. Giselle's argument is that taxes should be increased to cut consumption of gasoline, not to raise revenue. Antoine ignores this fact and argues that if the government needs additional revenue (which Giselle does not claim) then the burden should be distributed evenly.