Any tax relief received by the solar industry would not benefit the homeowner who installs a solar- energy system. Even though homeowners would pay a lower price for solar-energy system installations because of this tax relief, with the government paying the balance, government revenues come from the public.
The argument above is based on which of the following assumptions?
(A) The tax relief would cause the homeowner to lose, through taxes or reduced government benefits or both, an amount at least equal to the reduction in the price of that home- owner's solar-energy system installation.
CORRECT, The argument concludes that Homemaker even after getting the installation of solar-energy at reduced price would not benefit. If we negate this answer choice, tax relief will not cause homeowners to lose any kind of benefits which will make our conclusion fall apart The benefits are getting offset by some alternate reasons like increased amount of taxes(B) The tax relief that would be received by solar- energy industries would not be offered at the same time as any tax relief for other industries.
OUT OF SCOPE as we are not concerned with comparison of timing of tax relief provided by other industries(C) Advertisements of the solar-energy industry, by failing to identify the source of government revenues explicitly to the public, mask the advantage the industry receives from the public.
OUT OF SCOPE as advertisements whether able to identify the source of govt. revenues is not we are concerned with(D) Homeowners generally believe that they benefit from any tax relief offered to the solar-energy industry.-
OUT OF SCOPE, Homeowners belief is out of question here(E) Tax relief would encourage solar industries to sell solar-energy systems at higher prices.
NOT RELEVANT as ultimately we are looking for an answer choice which shows that the tax benefits received are negated by other alternate reasonsnightblade354 Whether my reasons for Option Elimination are correct?
Kindly review once