|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 1089
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
Under current federal law, employers are allowed to offer [#permalink]
 01 Jun 2005, 17:13
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Under current federal law, employers are allowed to offer their employees free parking spaces as a tax-free benefit, but they can offer employees only up to $180 per year as a tax-free benefit for using mass transit. The government could significantly increase mass transit ridership by raising the limit of this benefit to meet commuters’ transportation costs.
The proposal above to increase mass transit ridership assumes that
(A) current mass transit systems are subject to unexpected route closings and delays
(B) using mass transit creates less air pollution per person than using a private automobile
(C) the parking spaces offered by employers as tax-free benefits can be worth as much as $2,500 per year
(D) many employees are deterred by financial considerations from using mass transit to commute to their places of employment
(E) because of traffic congestion on major commuter routes, it is often faster to travel to one’s place of employment by means of mass transit than by private automobile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
(D) many employees are deterred by financial considerations from using mass transit to commute to their places of employment
- This assumption is needed for the assumption to hold. If financial considerations were holding commuters from using the mass transit, then providing an improved tax-free beenfit for mass transit could attract commuters to switch to the mass transit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 18 Feb 2005
Posts: 720
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
D....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 508
Location: Milan Italy
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
I acknowledge that D is correct, but
What's wrong with C?
They "CAN" be worth...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 648
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
(D) for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 328
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
One more for D.
C says it can be worth $2500, there is no reference of this figure in the argment. More over negating C, doesn't make the argument fall apart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 553
Location: Canuckland
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 335
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
one more for D
GA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 379
Location: India
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
gandy_achar wrote: one more for D
GA
I vote for D too.
HMTG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
