I agree with you on your reasoning behind choice "C"..but I do not concur with the explanation for elimination of choice "D"..
Question stem is like this if not A(the answer choice) then not B(the vicious cycle)
Choice "D" states that unless
the low tax rates are reinforced with
the hefty fines for the evasion, the tax evasion is bound to occur
.This choice is vague.Now if this statement were true then the so called vicious cycle will not occur.If A(the answer choice) then not B(The vicious cycle)
Thus choice "D" is out!
Choice "C" states that Lawmakers do not account for the lost revenue through evasion.This statement must be true because if lawmakers would have accounted for the lost revenue then they won't have increased the interest rates.If not A(the answer choice) then not B(the vicious cycle)Which makes "C" the best among all choices.
I must say this was a close call between C and D.
Both these options introduce a new reason as an assumption. Options A,B and E can be POE'd.
However, option D if you negate the statement then it actually supports the argument.As, lowering tax rates and putting fine won't deter the evaders.Thus the increase in tax rates by the law maker. Hence POE.
In option C, using negation there won't be a necessity for the lawmakers to increase the tax rates,if they had planned for the revenue lost.Hence, the argument falls apart. Thus it is the OA.
Good question indeed.
We are twice armed if we fight with faith.
He who knows when he can fight & when He can't will be victorious.