GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 29 Jan 2020, 08:24

### 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

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

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 165
A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 24 May 2019, 00:59
8
46
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

54% (01:53) correct 46% (02:00) wrong based on 1382 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?

A. New house sales are directly tied to personal income.

B. New house sales cannot increase by more than 6% next year.

C. If the tax credit had been 50%, there would have been a larger increase in new house sales

D. Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.

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

Originally posted by bschool83 on 10 Jul 2011, 12:50.
Last edited by Bunuel on 24 May 2019, 00:59, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Intern
Joined: 06 Jul 2011
Posts: 20
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2011, 22:43
3
2
2
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.
##### General Discussion
Manager
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 216
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V40
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2011, 07:21
3
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.
Manager
Joined: 14 Feb 2010
Posts: 103
Location: Banaglore
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2011, 00:53
Can some one please explain why E is incorrect?
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 316
Location: Azerbaijan
Concentration: Finance
Schools: HEC '15 (A)
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V38
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2012, 12:04
My way of thinking is the following -
I think that the question is actually an assumption type.
We have the conclusion - Obviously, this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes.

In assumption type of questions we need to find either contender or defender
Lets negate answ choice D -
Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.
In this case the argument falls apart. I mean if the tax credit is not a reason of low sales, then the conclusion is erroneous

thats why D is ok
_________________
Happy are those who dream dreams and are ready to pay the price to make them come true

I am still on all gmat forums. msg me if you want to ask me smth
Retired Moderator
Joined: 04 Aug 2016
Posts: 471
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Telecommunications)
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2016, 09:29
I did not follow the explanation provided. Can someone break it down please?
Board of Directors
Status: QA & VA Forum Moderator
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 4868
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2016, 13:18
2
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 Jan 2017
Posts: 133
GMAT 1: 640 Q50 V25
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
GPA: 3.48
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2017, 18:42
I chose option (D), but just had a question: this is an inference question, right?
From question stems, I think this is an inference question. But when looking at above comments, I saw many ppl say this is an assumption question. Could anyone shed some light?
Manager
Joined: 15 Jun 2016
Posts: 75
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 May 2017, 10:52
Hello expert, could you please explain why option 'e' is wrong?
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutors
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 3126
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2017, 14:53
VKat wrote:
Hello expert, could you please explain why option 'e' is wrong?

Quote:
(E) Tax credits for specific purchases are usually ineffective in influencing consumers to make those purchases.

The question asks, "Which of the following must be true if the above conclusion is to be properly drawn?" The conclusion is that the tax credit has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes. It doesn't matter whether tax credits are usually ineffective. If, on the other hand, tax credits are usually effective but do not influence consumers to purchase homes, the conclusion can still be properly drawn.
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutors @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: all videos by topic

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Manager
Status: Turning my handicaps into assets
Joined: 09 Apr 2017
Posts: 120
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 May 2018, 12:29
But conclusion says: Obviously, this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes. So, presence or absence of the law doesn't matter. Then why absence of the law would yield positive result i.e sales wouldn't drop significantly? According to D presence or absence of the law DOES matter that presence of the law generates negative consequence. What I am missing here? GMATNinja, your help would be much appreciated.
_________________
If time was on my side, I'd still have none to waste......
Manager
Joined: 20 Feb 2015
Posts: 69
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 May 2018, 07:24
Manager
Joined: 01 Apr 2018
Posts: 124
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.9
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 May 2018, 08:05
1
Only option D 'Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower' eliminates the weakness (the alternate explanation for the decrease in sales) in the argument and thus it must be true in order to draw the conclusion that 'law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes'.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutors
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 3126
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2018, 22:21
2
swathiallumalla wrote:

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

We don't care about what tax credits USUALLY do to consumers. We only care about whether this tax credit helped or hurt new home sales.

Even if tax credits are usually effective, the author would claim that they were not effective in this case, citing the decline in growth. The author's argument does not rely on (E), so it can be eliminated.

Mehemmed wrote:
But conclusion says: Obviously, this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes. So, presence or absence of the law doesn't matter. Then why absence of the law would yield positive result i.e sales wouldn't drop significantly? According to D presence or absence of the law DOES matter that presence of the law generates negative consequence. What I am missing here? GMATNinja, your help would be much appreciated.

We are told that "since the law was passed, the growth in sales of newly constructed homes has dropped each year, from 15% to 10% to 5%." According to the author, this is evidence that "the law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes."

Now imagine if the law had not been passed. In that case, what if growth in sales of new homes was significantly lower? What if growth, in that case, went from 15% to 5% to 1%? Maybe without the law, sales of newly constructed homes would have even DECREASED (i.e. 15% to 0% to -15%).

Even though growth decreased each year, the law may have prevented new home sales from plummeting. If (D) were not true, then new house sales would have been significantly lower without the law, and the numbers would have been much worse than 15%-10%-5%. That would imply that the law DID have a significant effect.
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutors @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: all videos by topic

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Valar Dohaeris
Joined: 31 Aug 2016
Posts: 302
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V37
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2018, 03:11
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. 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.

This is a Cause and Effect case
The argument says "law" is not the cause for the effect "drop in sale of newly constructed homes"

So if we can further provides support for this relation, that will the answer.

Quote:
D. Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.

This means even if the "law" was not there, the effect "drop in sales" would have been still there.
_________________
Intern
Joined: 11 Apr 2018
Posts: 1
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Aug 2018, 10:19
zuberahmed wrote:
Can some one please explain why E is incorrect?

because it picks up an instance and generalizes it, which is not acceptable
CR Forum Moderator
Joined: 25 Apr 2018
Posts: 669
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2019, 08:49
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. 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?

A. New house sales are directly tied to personal income.

B. New house sales cannot increase by more than 6% next year.

C. If the tax credit had been 50%, there would have been a larger increase in new house sales

D. Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.

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

KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Step 1: Identify the Question Type

For a conclusion to be properly drawn from the evidence, the author's assumption must be true. Thus, this is an Assumption question.

Step 2: Untangle the Stimulus

The conclusion comes after the keyword, “obviously.” The author believes the law has had little or no effect on sales of newly constructed homes. The author's evidence is that since the law was passed three years ago, sales of such homes has dropped each year.

A conclusion that states that X has had no effect on Y assumes that Y would have been the same without X. Here, the author is assuming that the sales figures would have been the same had the law not been passed. The sales figures would not have been higher, nor would they have been even lower.

Step 4: Evaluate the Choices

(D) matches the prediction. The author must be assuming that without the credit, sales would not have been even significantly lower than they actually were. If they would have been lower, then the credit did have an effect on the sales of the homes. Thus, (D) is correct.

(A) doesn't have to be true for the conclusion to follow from the evidence. The argument is about the connection between the sales figures and whether the law has had an effect on new homes sales. (A) has nothing to do with that connection.

(B) is wrong because the argument is about what effect the law has already had. What will happen next year is irrelevant.

(C) goes against the author's reasoning, implying that the tax credit does indeed affect sales of new homes.

(E) is wrong because the author doesn't have to assume anything at all about purchases in general, and what effect tax credits “usually” have. The author is only concerned with new homes in Rockville and the law passed there.

TAKEAWAY: Be very clear on the evidence and conclusion of the argument, and stick to the connection between them. Irrelevant choices are quite common, and can be easily spotted by having a good paraphrase of the argument.
Manager
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Posts: 134
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q51 V32
Re: A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Oct 2019, 02:02
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?

Question is pointing to assumption question

Conclusion: law of tax credit does not have any effect on the sales of constructed houses
Pre thinking: Below is necessary to assume for conclusion to hold
1. if law is not passed, there wont be any spur in construction of houses
2. passing a law is only way to increase the sale

lets have a look at answer choice and do POE

A. New house sales are directly tied to personal income. -irreevant

B. New house sales cannot increase by more than 6% next year.-irrelevant

C. If the tax credit had been 50%, there would have been a larger increase in new house sales
-irrelevant, going too far from conclusion
D. Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower.
- matching our pre thinking, negate it, conclusion will break
E. Tax credits for specific purchases are usually ineffective in influencing consumers to make those purchases.
-specific purchases, wrong

So OA:D
Manager
Joined: 21 Feb 2017
Posts: 106
A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2019, 00:08
zuberahmed wrote:
Can some one please explain why E is incorrect?

VKat @warrierguy

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

The first issue is the use of usually - this means may or may not we cannot be sure

The second issue is it doesn't anywhere mention tax credit for newly constructed houses? it only mentions for specific purchases? what are these purchases? We dont know.. hence out.

--

+1 kudos if this post helped!
Intern
Joined: 28 Oct 2019
Posts: 3
A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Dec 2019, 23:52
First - Must be true is an inference question not an assumption question so there is no negating business to be done here

Next - Clear Elimination candidates are D and E

Given its an inference question something has to support the conclusion that
this law has had little or no effect on the sale of newly constructed homes.
The law pertains to tax credit

D. Without the tax credit, new house sales would not have been significantly lower. (this actually weakens the conclusion and says that the tax credit has some kind of effect on the sales - do it anyway - negate - don't negate and try to make sense of the double negative etc. ) - Eliminate D on final check

E. Tax credits for specific purchases are usually ineffective in influencing consumers to make those purchases. Keep E
(This is unstated - thus inference step 1 check. yes does not mention house sales and could suggest that it is too broad or off topic - but this is correct answer in this case)
A law passed in Rockville three years ago allows a 30% tax credit to   [#permalink] 05 Dec 2019, 23:52
Display posts from previous: Sort by