It is currently 11 Dec 2017, 14:10

### 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 proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Status: "Listen, smile, agree, and then do whatever the f**k you were gonna do anyway." - Quite a status, Huh!
Joined: 03 Mar 2013
Posts: 13

Kudos [?]: 22 [1], given: 11

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2013, 15:31
1
KUDOS
I went for B.

According to MGMAT CR the core structure of the argument should be Premise->Intermediate Conclusion->Conclusion.
If the last sentence is the conclusion then A becomes out of scope as it supports the Intermediate Conclusion while B would support the main conclusion.

I am not quite sure about A being the OA, but if GMAT says so I ain't no Shakespeare to revolt it..
_________________

Life is too short not to be an MBA...

Kudos [?]: 22 [1], given: 11

Manager
Joined: 13 Jul 2013
Posts: 69

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 21

GMAT 1: 570 Q46 V24
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2014, 01:05
The option A says at least some. So if there are 50 wealthy donators, going by the statement we can assume that there maybe 20 wealthy individuals not donating any money. Still 30 will there to donate. i don't understand why A is the best choice?

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 21

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 353

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 70

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2014, 07:16
MODIFIED ELEMENTS OF ARGUMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS-----

CONCLUSION- Many charitable and institutions would have to reduce services, and some would have to close their doors.
PREMISE-1. A proposed change to federal income tax laws would MAKE DONATIONS TAXABLE....

PREMISE-2. Wealthy individuals WILL HAVE TO PAY TAXES...

GUESS ON ASSUMPTION----
1. SOME WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS MAY NOT DONATE IF DONATIONS ARE NOT TAXABLE.....
2. DONATIONS BY WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS DOES MATTER WHEN PROVIDING SERVICES ....

The argument above assumes which of the following?

(A) Without incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would not donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwise would have. CORRECT

(B) Money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of provisions in the federal tax laws provides the only source of funding for many charitable and educational institutions.... EXTREME....... INCORRECT....

(C) The primary reason for not adopting the proposed change in the federal income tax laws cited above is to protect wealthy individuals from having to pay higher taxes. INCORRECT

(D) Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions. EXTREME...

(E) Income tax laws should be changed to make donations to charitable and educational institutions the only permissible deductions from taxable income.INCORRECT

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 70

Manager
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 57

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 10

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2014, 16:25
why not D ???
the conclusion says : Therefore, many charitable and institutions would have to reduce services, and some would have to close their doors.

D says :Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions.

if you negate D you will get " wealthy people are not the only one who pay to charities , so there are other people who donate ,,, this means that the charities will not close because they have another source. (the conclusion weakened)

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 10

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 353

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 70

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2014, 07:28
CLEARLY " A"......
"D" IS EXTREME AND NEED NOT BE TRUE TO THE EXTENT GIVEN..... EVEN A MODERATE VERSION IS OK.... IN OTHER WORDS "IT'S A OVER KILL".......

hope it helps......

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 70

Intern
Joined: 18 Aug 2013
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 18

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Feb 2014, 09:35
checked in og OA is A. so check with og for write OA.

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 18

Board of Directors
Status: QA & VA Forum Moderator
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 3105

Kudos [?]: 1142 [0], given: 327

Location: India
GPA: 3.5
WE: Business Development (Commercial Banking)
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Feb 2014, 10:30
omega17 wrote:
A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate deductions from taxable income for donations a taxpayer has made to charitable and educational institutions. If this change were adopted, wealthy individuals would no longer be permitted such deductions. Therefore, many charitable and institutions would have to reduce services, and some would have to close their doors.

Proposed - Eliminate deductions from Taxable income if taxpayers make to charitable and educational institutions.

If adopted - Wealthy Individuals would no longer be permitted such deductions.

Conclusion - charitable and educational institutions would have to close their services.

The argument above assumes which of the following?

(A) Without incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would not donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwise would have.

True why would Wealthy Individuals like to donate to charitable and educational institutions ?

(B) Money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of provisions in the federal tax laws provides the only source of funding for many charitable and educational institutions.

Over emphasis , hence not true.

(C) The primary reason for not adopting the proposed change in the federal income tax laws cited above is to protect wealthy individuals from having to pay higher taxes.

Irrelevant and out of scope.

(D) Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions.

The passage doesn't mention that wealthy people are the only contributors.

(E) Income tax laws should be changed to make donations to charitable and educational institutions the only permissible deductions from taxable income.

Mentions a proposed course of action , this can not be an assumption.

Hence IMO (A) looks the best..
_________________

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 )

Kudos [?]: 1142 [0], given: 327

Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2013
Posts: 267

Kudos [?]: 110 [0], given: 29

Location: India
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2014, 21:55
Options B and D are too extreme assumptions because of the word 'only'.The conclusion is MANY would reduce services while only SOME would shut shop.That implies the rich are not the ONLY source.

Kudos [?]: 110 [0], given: 29

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10155

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2015, 13:28
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.

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Current Student
Joined: 24 Feb 2010
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.46
WE: Engineering (Telecommunications)
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2015, 17:43
If we look at the last two line of the argument

"If this change were adopted, wealthy individuals would no longer be permitted such deductions. Therefore, many charitable and institutions would have to reduce services, and some would have to close their doors. "

We can that there is a disconnect between the two. Wealthy individuals would not be permitted such deductions but how will that impact the money flow to the charitable institutions and that's where (A) comes in. Hence A is the correct answer

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 43

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 33

Location: Brazil
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 640 Q39 V38
GMAT 2: 700 Q47 V38
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Mar 2016, 12:51

Got it right by elimination.

(A) Without incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would not donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwis would have. CORRECT: it it not clear that ALL institutions would close. The TONE is not EXTREME in this answer choice

(B) Money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of provisions in the federal tax laws provides the only source of funding for many charitable and educational institutions. THE ONLY source is a very extreme assumption

(C) The primary reason for not adopting the proposed change in the federal income tax laws cited above is to protect wealthy individuals from having to pay higher taxes. out of scope

(D) Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions. how can this be assumed, we have no info about it. WRONG

(E) Income tax laws should be changed to make donations to charitable and educational institutions the only permissible deductions from taxable income. Again, out of scope. doesn't help.

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 33

Manager
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 135 [0], given: 424

Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Technology
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2016, 16:48
A as it is the most conservative answer choice out of all of them. Good strategy to use in these situations. Those considering B or D, realize that for these assumption questions 'only' 'all' type wording usually takes it too far

Kudos [?]: 135 [0], given: 424

Manager
Joined: 23 Jan 2016
Posts: 212

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 510

Location: India
GPA: 3.2
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jul 2016, 09:08
ConnectTheDots wrote:
A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate deductions from
taxable income for donations a taxpayer has made to charitable and
educational institutions. If this change were adopted, wealthy individuals
would no longer be permitted such deductions. Therefore, many charitable
and educational institutions would have to reduce services, and some would
have to close their doors.

The argument above assumes which of the following?

(A) Without the incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some
wealthy individuals
would not donate as much money to charitable and
educational institutions as they otherwise would have.
(B) Money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of
provisions in the federal tax laws provides the only source of funding for
many charitable and educational institutions. - In such case many would have closed doors. But my argument does'nt say that.
(C) The primary reason for not adopting the proposed change in the federal
income tax laws cited above is to protect wealthy individuals from having to
pay higher taxes.
(D) Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational
institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions.
(E) Income tax laws should be changed to make donations to charitable and
educational institutions the only permissible deductions from taxable
income.

OA is A.
This is an OG 10 question.
OE:

The passage argues that charitable and educational institutions, part of whose income comes from donations,
would be negatively affected if wealthy individuals could not count such donations as deductions from their
income. The question asks you to identify an assumption of the argument-that is, something that has to be true
in order for the evidence presented to establish the conclusion.
Choice A is the best answer, since if this statement is false, all wealthy individuals would, even without the
incentive provided by federal tax laws, donate as much money as they do now. In that case, the evidence used
in the argument provides no support for the conclusion.
Choice B is not assumed: the argument need only assume that many institutions depend heavily, but not
necessarily exclusively, on donations from such individuals. Choice C is incorrect given that the argument is
concerned only with the consequences of the proposed change and makes no assumption about any reasons
for making or not making the change. Choice D is not assumed: as far as the argument is concerned, there can
be many other individuals who donate money to the institutions. Choice E is incorrect since the argument, being
about the consequences of the particular proposed change, does not make any assumption about what
alternative changes to the tax laws ought to be made.

Thank you so much, I think this makes it clear why B is not the answer. I had also wrongly opted for B.

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 510

Intern
Joined: 09 Nov 2016
Posts: 41

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 7

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Oct 2017, 21:10
Hello Experts,

Could you please explain why A is correct & B and D are wrong, even though all shatter the conclusion on negating them?

Thanks.

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 7

GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1222

Kudos [?]: 2027 [1], given: 462

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2017, 18:08
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
snjainpune wrote:
Hello Experts,

Could you please explain why A is correct & B and D are wrong, even though all shatter the conclusion on negating them?

Thanks.

Quote:
A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate deductions from taxable income for donations a taxpayer has made to charitable and educational institutions. If this change were adopted, wealthy individuals would no longer be permitted such deductions. Therefore, many charitable and institutions would have to reduce services, and some would have to close their doors.

The argument above assumes which of the following?

(A) Without incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would not donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwis would have.

(B) Money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of provisions in the federal tax laws provides the only source of funding for many charitable and educational institutions.

(C) The primary reason for not adopting the proposed change in the federal income tax laws cited above is to protect wealthy individuals from having to pay higher taxes.

(D) Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions.

(E) Income tax laws should be changed to make donations to charitable and educational institutions the only permissible deductions from taxable income.

The idea is that if wealthy individuals are no longer permitted to deduct donations from their taxes, then "many charitable and educational institutions would have to reduce services." This rests on the assumption that without the tax incentives, the wealthy individuals will not donate as much (choice A). As a result, those institutions would have less money and have to reduce services.

In order to draw the conclusion, wealthy individuals do not have to be the ONLY source of funding for those institutions. Even if donations from wealth individuals account for, say, half of the funding, if those donations are significantly reduced, the institutions would lose a lot of money. Thus, choice (B) can be eliminated.

Choice (D) can be eliminated for the same reason. Wealthy individuals do not have to be the ONLY individuals who make donations. Regardless, if the donations from just the wealthy individuals are reduced, the institutions would lose money and have to reduce services.

Choice (A) is the best answer.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor at www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Friendly warning: I'm bad at PMs

GMAT Ninja Wednesdays LIVE on YouTube

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

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 -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post.

Sentence Correction 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?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, 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... in any section order

"Next-level" GMAT pronouns | Uses of "that" on the GMAT | Parallelism and meaning | Simplifying GMAT verb tenses | Comparisons, part I |
November webinar schedule

Kudos [?]: 2027 [1], given: 462

Intern
Joined: 29 Jun 2014
Posts: 22

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 33

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2017, 21:55
Please explain the negation of Option A

Sent from my SM-A510F using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 33

Intern
Joined: 04 Dec 2016
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 34

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2017, 22:12
vishwajeet2015 wrote:
Please explain the negation of Option A

Sent from my SM-A510F using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Hi

(A) Without the incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would not donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwise would have.

The negation of the option A is:
Thinking logically, if there are some wealthy persons who would donate less money
Then if this negated, it means, no wealthy persons would donate less money OR All wealthy individual would donate the same amount of money.
So now the conclusion breaks as if the above negation happens charitable institutions wont suffer from funds.

Hope this helps
Regards
S

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 34

Intern
Joined: 09 Nov 2016
Posts: 41

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 7

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Oct 2017, 02:31
GMATNinja wrote:
snjainpune wrote:
Hello Experts,

Could you please explain why A is correct & B and D are wrong, even though all shatter the conclusion on negating them?

Thanks.

Quote:
A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate deductions from taxable income for donations a taxpayer has made to charitable and educational institutions. If this change were adopted, wealthy individuals would no longer be permitted such deductions. Therefore, many charitable and institutions would have to reduce services, and some would have to close their doors.

The argument above assumes which of the following?

(A) Without incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would not donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwis would have.

(B) Money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of provisions in the federal tax laws provides the only source of funding for many charitable and educational institutions.

(C) The primary reason for not adopting the proposed change in the federal income tax laws cited above is to protect wealthy individuals from having to pay higher taxes.

(D) Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions.

(E) Income tax laws should be changed to make donations to charitable and educational institutions the only permissible deductions from taxable income.

The idea is that if wealthy individuals are no longer permitted to deduct donations from their taxes, then "many charitable and educational institutions would have to reduce services." This rests on the assumption that without the tax incentives, the wealthy individuals will not donate as much (choice A). As a result, those institutions would have less money and have to reduce services.

In order to draw the conclusion, wealthy individuals do not have to be the ONLY source of funding for those institutions. Even if donations from wealth individuals account for, say, half of the funding, if those donations are significantly reduced, the institutions would lose a lot of money. Thus, choice (B) can be eliminated.

Choice (D) can be eliminated for the same reason. Wealthy individuals do not have to be the ONLY individuals who make donations. Regardless, if the donations from just the wealthy individuals are reduced, the institutions would lose money and have to reduce services.

Choice (A) is the best answer.

Thanks a lot, GMATNinja!!

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 7

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate   [#permalink] 28 Oct 2017, 02:31

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 38 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne 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®.