It is currently 12 Dec 2017, 10:15

### 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

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 23

Kudos [?]: 44 [3], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 13:35
3
KUDOS
40
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

52% (01:29) correct 48% (01:41) wrong based on 1716 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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 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.
===================
[Reveal] Spoiler:
I got it down to A and D

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by GMATNinjaTwo on 25 Oct 2017, 08:57, edited 2 times in total.

Kudos [?]: 44 [3], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 19 May 2008
Posts: 51

Kudos [?]: 7 [2], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 14:00
2
KUDOS
It is relatively easy to eliminate all the others except A and D.

It's not D because you don't need to assume that ONLY wealthy individuals donate to charities. It is safe to assume that "some" wealthy individuals donate to charities. If those stop donating then some charities would have to reduce their service or even close their doors if they depend too much on wealthy individuals.

Simply put, D is too safe an assumption.

Kudos [?]: 7 [2], given: 0

Director
Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 782

Kudos [?]: 254 [2], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 14:39
2
KUDOS
A too

The conclusion assumed that rich people only donate because they get the tax break.

Kudos [?]: 254 [2], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 4

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

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

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 17:37
3
KUDOS
Many charitable and educational institutions would be forced to reduce services and even shutdown only when they do not have enough money.
According to the passage, these institutions will close if the proposed change takes effect which means the only source of their finance should be the "money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of provisions in the federal tax laws". The conclusion is based on this assumption. So, the answer is B.

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

Intern
Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 23

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

20 May 2008, 08:21
gmatnub wrote:
A too

The conclusion assumed that rich people only donate because they get the tax break.

I was pondering... and yes, what you said is very true. I didn't get the subtlety at first, but reading two choices carefully, they're indeed different

A) shows the relationship between tax break and donation
D) simply indicates that the rich donates (may be affected by the tax break or not, who knows?)

Thx, gmatnub, and everyone who replied

BTW, OA is A

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 06 Oct 2009
Posts: 104

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 4

Location: Mexico
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GPA: 3.85
WE: Sales (Commercial Banking)
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Oct 2012, 12:06
I went for B as well, but after a second look seems too extreme.

Cheers

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 4

Manager
Joined: 06 May 2012
Posts: 75

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 16

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

### Show Tags

22 Oct 2012, 15:55
Bull78 wrote:
I went for B as well, but after a second look seems too extreme.

Cheers

(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.

Yes. B looks little extreme as it mentioned 'The federal tax laws provides the only source of funding''

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 16

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1375

Kudos [?]: 1720 [0], given: 62

Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2012, 00:56
Any more takers why B is incorrect?
Could it have been the answer if in the stimulus it were given that the charitable institutions and educational institutions would have to "close their doors" rather than "reduce their services, and some would have to close their doors"?
Is "reduce their services" implying that the institutions are still getting some money, though in small amount from others?
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1720 [0], given: 62

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 333

Kudos [?]: 437 [5], given: 4

Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Dec 2012, 03:37
5
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi Marcab,

The key word is as has been pointed out 'only'.

In your example I don't think B would be good either. Even if it was that the charities had to stop functioning, that doesn't mean that the tax relief donors were the only ones. For example if they had made up 99% of the donations, and that were to be taken away the charities would probably still have to stop functioning, yet the 1% of other donors would mean that the tax relief donors were not the 'only' donors.

Hope that helps.

james
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Kudos [?]: 437 [5], given: 4

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1375

Kudos [?]: 1720 [1], given: 62

Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Dec 2012, 03:56
1
KUDOS
Hii James.
Mathematically speaking, If I say that there is a trust called xyz. It is financially supported by donors, who pay 90% of the donated amount.
Consider the entire amount \$100,000. If 90% of the amount comes from the donors, then only \$10K remains since the wealthy donors no more donate.
With this \$10K, the charitable trust has to reduce its services.

Now my question is that since the wealthy donors are the only ones who donate, then there is no provision for 90%-10%. Only share that remains will be either 100% or 0%.
In that case, won't the trust be closed? Given the fact the trust will only be closed rather than "closed or reduce its services"?
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1720 [1], given: 62

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 333

Kudos [?]: 437 [1], given: 4

Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Dec 2012, 04:01
1
KUDOS
Hi Marcab,

My theory was that even if a charity only has 10% of its former donations 'closing the doors' might be necessary anyway. As with 10% they can't even perform the basic services.

Whether you agree with this idea or not, I still think it puts an element of doubt into 'B' which makes the word 'only' difficult.
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Kudos [?]: 437 [1], given: 4

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1375

Kudos [?]: 1720 [0], given: 62

Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Dec 2012, 04:12
well that depends on the services the trust offers.
Anyways not going to dive too much in this, will keep my cerebellum intact for quant.
Thanks a ton.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1720 [0], given: 62

Manager
Joined: 05 Jan 2011
Posts: 60

Kudos [?]: 182 [0], given: 7

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

### Show Tags

15 Dec 2012, 06:04
Hi Marcab

Lets say if we have to get inference of the argument instead of Assumption of argument?

Then even in that case - I believe (A) would be correct .Agree?

Kudos [?]: 182 [0], given: 7

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1375

Kudos [?]: 1720 [0], given: 62

Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Dec 2012, 06:10
You can't infer in assumption question.
Inference is the context that has been explicitly stated in the stimulus whereas assumption is the context that helps us to jump from premise to conclusion.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1720 [0], given: 62

Intern
Joined: 06 Dec 2012
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GPA: 2
WE: Sales (Consumer Products)
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Dec 2012, 05:21
B and D also base on the assumptions that without the incentive, some wealthy people won't donate as much as they would otherwise. So A is the prime assumptions.

I chose B wrongly. But B is wrong not for the word ONLY. B also relies on A as the assumption.

This is a good 'assumption question'

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 03 Jun 2012
Posts: 54

Kudos [?]: 30 [1], given: 5

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

### Show Tags

09 Jun 2013, 23:29
1
KUDOS
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.
(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.

Last edited by soniedarshan on 10 Jun 2013, 01:11, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 30 [1], given: 5

Intern
Joined: 16 May 2013
Posts: 30

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 13

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

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2013, 00:18
soniedarshan 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.
(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 OA posted for this question is certainly wrong. I have been monitoring the questions posted by soniedarshan, and it seems that there is a pattern in revealing the OA. Last all topics have OA as D. I have checked the OA's on other forums and the OA's do not match. Please refrain from posting OA if you are not sure.

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 13

Current Student
Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Posts: 175

Kudos [?]: 365 [0], given: 73

Concentration: Sustainability, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44
WE: Business Development (Internet and New Media)
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2013, 02:53
I'd go with B and based on comment above going to refrain from answering to Ms Darshans posts
_________________

You've been walking the ocean's edge, holding up your robes to keep them dry. You must dive naked under, and deeper under, a thousand times deeper! - Rumi

http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index.php/author/cbermanmanhattanprep-com/ - This is worth its weight in gold

Economist GMAT Test - 730, Q50, V41 Aug 9th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 670, Q45, V36 Aug 11th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 680, Q47, V36 Aug 17th, 2013
GmatPrep CAT 1 - 770, Q50, V44 Aug 24th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 690, Q45, V39 Aug 30th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 710, Q48, V39 Sep 13th, 2013
GmatPrep CAT 2 - 740, Q49, V41 Oct 6th, 2013

GMAT - 770, Q50, V44, Oct 7th, 2013
My Debrief - http://gmatclub.com/forum/from-the-ashes-thou-shall-rise-770-q-50-v-44-awa-5-ir-162299.html#p1284542

Kudos [?]: 365 [0], given: 73

Current Student
Joined: 28 Apr 2012
Posts: 306

Kudos [?]: 486 [6], given: 142

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 770 Q50 V47
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2013, 06:45
6
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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.
_________________

"Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well."
― Voltaire

Press Kudos, if I have helped.
Thanks!

Kudos [?]: 486 [6], given: 142

Intern
Joined: 03 Jun 2013
Posts: 1

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

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

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2013, 08:55
1
KUDOS
this seems to be a tricky one..even i went for D

in my opinion d only explanation i could find for A being the answer is..

As the conclusion says:Therefore, many charitable and educational 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.

That means if Wealthy individuals are the only people doing charity.. then all institutions will have to shut down.

But as the conclusion says only some institutions will close down.

I tried use negation rule on A..
Without the incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwise would have.

i.e even if there are no incentives provided by govt. wealthy people will do charity.Thus it means that the institutions will not have to shut down.This goes against the conclusion.

The thing is, if we use negation rule on D ,the conclusion is not weakened.. I guess soniedarshan might also made the same mistake. but he has edited the OA, i guess. And I think people might have seen questions posted by soniedarshan that have OA as D. I checked all his questions on other forums and they are all fine. People should stop making such conclusions without any evidence.

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

Re: A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate   [#permalink] 10 Jun 2013, 08:55

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 38 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by