Advances in photocopying technology allow criminals with no printing expertise to counterfeit paper currency. One standard anti counterfeiting technique, microprinting, prints paper currency with tiny designs that cannot be photocopied distinctly. Although counterfeits of micro printed currency can be detected easily by experts, such counterfeits often circulate widely before being detected. An alternative , though more costly, printing technique would print currency with a special ink. Currency printed with the ink would change color depending on how ordinary light strikes it, whereas photocopied counterfeits of such currency would not. Because this technique would allow anyone to detect photocopied counterfeit currency easily, it should be adopted instead of micro printing, despite the expense.

Which one of the following, if true, provides the most undermines the argument?
A) The longer the interval between the time a counterfeit bill passes into circulation and the time for counterfeit is detected, the more difficult it is for law law enforcement officials to apprehend the counterfeiter.
B) Sophisticated counterfeiters could produce currency printed with the special ink but cannot duplicate microprinted currency exactly.
C) Further advances in photocopying technology will dramatically increases the level of details that photocopies can reproduce.
D) The largest quantities of counterfeit currency now entering circulation are produced by ordinary criminals who engage in counterfeiting only briefly.
E) It is very difficult to make accurate estimates of what costs to society would be if large amounts of counterfeit currency circulated widely.

Please give your justification for every choice. OA to come later.