GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 18 Oct 2019, 17:07

### 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

# Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 648
Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Feb 2009, 22:26
5
33
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

35% (01:39) correct 65% (01:30) wrong based on 857 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?

(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.

_________________
http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html
Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 95
Location: United States

### Show Tags

05 Jan 2010, 11:51
9
It's gotta be C as E doesn't use the information from both statements. It only uses the information from the second statement. The stimulus says which conclusion comes from using both statements and only C does this.
##### General Discussion
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1160

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2009, 18:01
2
I will go with C. I find E weak. It talks about payment to public employees. Payment may not be the only source of income. The argument talks about the income of these employees.
Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 648
Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2009, 23:44
Its from LSAT series
OA-C
++++++++
request to you all Posters
pls post the OA within 8-10 discussions/24 hrs
do we have spoiler here?
++++++++++++++++
Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.
Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?
(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.
_________________
http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html
Manager
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 110

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2010, 07:21
1
(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise. irrelevant
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes. illogical
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers. chances are there waitlisted
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.irrelevant
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.comes close

I think C and E are more relevant to the question but between C and E I chose E because from the statement it is obvious that if taxes are abolished public employees wouldn't have any income

and also the above statement doesn't clearly states that pubilc employee are not real tax payers
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Location: Russian Federation
WE: Supply Chain Management (Energy and Utilities)

### Show Tags

07 Jan 2011, 07:13
1
1
I chose E but changed to C since, we have to consider both statments, choice E only considers the last statment. Additionally E is more of an inference other than a conclusion.
Intern
Joined: 29 Dec 2010
Posts: 3

### Show Tags

Updated on: 07 Jan 2011, 07:28
3
1
nitya34 wrote:
Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?

(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.

E is very close but the question is very tricky, so take into account this:

It is true that E can be logically derived from the second statement. The issue here is that the question is asking for a logical conclusion that depends on both statements. E only depends on the second statement and the first does not provide any informations relevant to conclude E

C on the other hand is a conclusion that depends on both statements:

(Please excuse my english, these are not formal logic procedures but they provide a general idea)
Lets suppose real tax payers are public employees
Supposition: x is a real tax payer <-> x is a public employee
Taxes are abolished -> y is a real tax payer ^ y has its disposable income increased
Taxes are abolished -> z is a public employee ^ z has its income dessapear
Lets take the person A, A is a real tax payer
Taxes are abolished then:
A is a real tax payer ^ A has its disposable income increased
A is a public employee ^ A has its disposable income increased
But also
A is a public employee ^ A has its income dessapear
So A has its disposable income increased ^ A has its income dessapear

Since we reached a contradiction we conclude that real tax payers cannot be public employees since disposable income cannot increase if the income dissapears.

We reach a contradiction that depend on both statements to proof. Answer E is also right, but it is not what the question is asking, be careful with tricky questions.

RegardsRegards

Originally posted by cvargasm on 07 Jan 2011, 07:23.
Last edited by cvargasm on 07 Jan 2011, 07:28, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 2

### Show Tags

07 Jan 2011, 07:29
I went with E.

The premise states that public employees salaries are funded with taxes (other possibilities like debt are slashed away).

However, public employees may have sources of rent (different from income) which may be taxable, converting them into real tax payers.
Intern
Joined: 29 Dec 2010
Posts: 3

### Show Tags

07 Jan 2011, 07:35
jcampomar wrote:
I went with E.

The premise states that public employees salaries are funded with taxes (other possibilities like debt are slashed away).

However, public employees may have sources of rent (different from income) which may be taxable, converting them into real tax payers.

The problem with this is that you are assuming and utilizing your knowledge to introduce new concepts to the statements, one should always get back and only use what the question provides, if you use all of our knowledge in logic proofs like this we will made them just un-proof-able, and what is correctly concluded through logic for you will be different for any other human being that didn't knew this fact or any other you just included, that is why one should stay back to use general or personal knowledge to include as inputs to the logic proof and only use what the statements settle, that way you will assure there is only one correct answer
Director
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 556
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
Re: Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jul 2016, 05:53
Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

No tax = real taxpayers will have more income
No tax= Public employee will have no income.
Conclusion:- No tax = Any one who is a real taxpayer will see some increase in income except public employee who will not get any income.

Since after removing tax the public employee income is not increased, then it must be concluded thais employee are not real taxpayers.

OPTION C is the correct answer

Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

nitya34 wrote:
Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?

(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.

_________________
Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.
LBS Moderator
Joined: 04 Jun 2018
Posts: 649
Location: Germany
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 730 Q47 V44
GPA: 3.4
WE: Analyst (Transportation)
Re: Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2019, 00:39
nightblade354 , I though you might like this one.

Many users seem to find it tricky, but I think its a good question.
_________________
Intern
Joined: 20 Aug 2017
Posts: 36
Re: Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2019, 08:24
Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?

(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.
----> does not come from the statements above, as no correlation between public offices and disposable incomes.

(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.
----> expenditure, taxes correlation not discussed.

(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.
---> if public employers had been real taxpayers then after abolishing taxes their disposable incomes would have increased.

(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.
---> is not implied from the argument.

(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.
---> if we assume that the extra disposable income that the real taxpayers generate, is used to pay the public employees income then this could be a conclusion.
But, this introduces an assumption that is out of scope. Eliminated
_________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody can defeat you, until you yourself give up!

If you like my solution, do give kudos!
Re: Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their   [#permalink] 01 Aug 2019, 08:24
Display posts from previous: Sort by