It is currently 19 Nov 2017, 13:04

### 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

# Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Mar 2011
Posts: 439

Kudos [?]: 218 [0], given: 20

Location: Texas
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jul 2011, 21:41
sgupta0827 wrote:
I was contemplating between C and D. Never thought the answer will be A. Any perspectives about D will be highly appreciated.

Business who are not doing well wont be given loans... i would think this as irrelevant statement. we dont know what percentage of such business are there...

And i think it was same thing with C... when it says 'some'.. again we dont know the #. if some refrain, many still invest

Kudos [?]: 218 [0], given: 20

Manager
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Posts: 65

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 10

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2011, 03:27
zhenmaster wrote:
Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for development loans. To help businesses, the government plans to modify the income-tax structure in order to induce individual taxpapyers to put a larger portion of their incomes into retirement savings accounts, because as more money is deposited in such accounts, more money becomes available to borrowers (i.e. businesses).

Get cash into account (\$\$\$\$\$\$\$) then get get businesses to borrow (\$\$\$\$\$\$\$)

Which of the following, if true, raises the most serious doubt regarding the effectiveness of the government's plan to increase the amount of money available for development loans for businesses?

A. When levels of personal retirement savings increase, consumer borrowing always increase correspondingly - if consumers borrow the cash there will be no cash available for businesses to borrow
B. The increased tax revenue the government would receive as a result of business expansino would not offset the loss in revenue from personal income taxes during the first year of the plan.
C. Even with tax incentives, some people will choose not to increase their levels of retirement savings.Some = how many? Some may very well equal 2 people out of 4 million people
D. Bankers generally will not continue to lend money to businesses whose prospective earnings are insufficient to meet their loan repayment schedules. Shell game. We are focusing on how successful will the process be of getting cash into accounts then getting businesses to borrow it. We are not concerned with terms of lending or the financial status of the business now or in the future. Also, correct me if i am wrong the loan does not necessarily has to come from banks (it can come from credit unions too). So this option is given as shell to confuse the test taker.
E. The modified tax structure would give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings.

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 10

Director
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 518

Kudos [?]: 304 [0], given: 16

Location: United States
GPA: 3.86
WE: Accounting (Commercial Banking)
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2011, 07:15
+1 A
_________________

Kudos [?]: 304 [0], given: 16

Manager
Status: SC SC SC SC SC.... Concentrating on SC alone.
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 234

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 47

Location: India
Concentration: General Management
GMAT Date: 12-30-2011
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Nov 2011, 11:17
+1 A
_________________

D- Day December 30 2011. Hoping for the happiest new year celebrations !

Aiming for 700+

Kudo me if the post is worth it

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 47

Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2011
Posts: 127

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 16

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Nov 2011, 12:15
IMO it is C.

Govt is under assumption that giving tax incentives will drive taxpayers to put more into Savings account which will inturn increase the money for loan construction.

C is the only one option that weakens this assumption.
_________________

Time to play the game...

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 16

Senior Manager
Status: D-Day is on February 10th. and I am not stressed
Affiliations: American Management association, American Association of financial accountants
Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 252

Kudos [?]: 369 [0], given: 52

Location: Kuwait
Schools: Columbia university
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Nov 2011, 15:23
i will go for C
_________________

Sky is the limit

Kudos [?]: 369 [0], given: 52

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2010
Posts: 280

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 1

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Nov 2011, 22:40
Between C and A, A is better...

C uses 'some', meaning that many of them will deposit... hence supports the conclusion.

A definitely highlights a flaw.

(originally went for C)

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 1

Director
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 672

Kudos [?]: 198 [2], given: 37

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Nov 2011, 22:46
2
KUDOS
+1 for A.

A very good practice question.

Premise 1 : Less money for business loans
Premise 2 : If more money is deposited in retirement account, more money is available to borrowers.

Conclusion: Govt plans to modify tax structure to induce more money in retirement accounts so that more money is avaialable for dev loans for businesses.

Choice A weakens the argument by saying that if more money is deposited in retirement accounts, consumer borrowing increases correspondingly. This means that more money would still not be available for dev loans to businesses.

Crick

Kudos [?]: 198 [2], given: 37

Manager
Joined: 05 Mar 2011
Posts: 145

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 3

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2011, 22:21
confused btw a n c- went with c

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 3

BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 888

Kudos [?]: 734 [0], given: 44

Location: Viet Nam
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2011, 20:46
A. When savings increase, the number of borrower also increases. So, It still lacks of money for the borrowers.
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Kudos [?]: 734 [0], given: 44

Director
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 518

Kudos [?]: 304 [0], given: 16

Location: United States
GPA: 3.86
WE: Accounting (Commercial Banking)
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2011, 22:01
Its A
_________________

Kudos [?]: 304 [0], given: 16

Director
Status: Enjoying the GMAT journey....
Joined: 26 Aug 2011
Posts: 713

Kudos [?]: 588 [0], given: 264

Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q49 V24
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2011, 22:38
C is so attractive that i too fell in its trap
yes guys thanx 4 explaning why A is correct.....
_________________

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.

A WAY TO INCREASE FROM QUANT 35-40 TO 47 : http://gmatclub.com/forum/a-way-to-increase-from-q35-40-to-q-138750.html

Q 47/48 To Q 50 + http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-final-climb-quest-for-q-50-from-q47-129441.html#p1064367

Three good RC strategies http://gmatclub.com/forum/three-different-strategies-for-attacking-rc-127287.html

Kudos [?]: 588 [0], given: 264

Manager
Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Posts: 240

Kudos [?]: 101 [1], given: 36

Location: United States
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 720 Q51 V36
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2011, 00:38
1
KUDOS
zhenmaster wrote:
Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for development loans. To help businesses, the government plans to modify the income-tax structure in order to induce individual taxpapyers to put a larger portion of their incomes into retirement savings accounts, because as more money is deposited in such accounts, more money becomes available to borrowers.

Which of the following, if true, raises the most serious doubt regarding the effectiveness of the government's plan to increase the amount of money available for development loans for businesses?

A. When levels of personal retirement savings increase, consumer borrowing always increase correspondingly
B. The increased tax revenue the government would receive as a result of business expansino would not offset the loss in revenue from personal income taxes during the first year of the plan.
C. Even with tax incentives, some people will choose not to increase their levels of retirement savings.
D. Bankers generally will not continue to lend money to businesses whose prospective earnings are insufficient to meet their loan repayment schedules.
E. The modified tax structure would give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings.

Businesses can't borrow because no money available.
Policy to encourage savings
Businesses will have more money available to borrow.

B - This could be true, but this has no bearing on the conclusion of this argument.
C- This can be an answer. But, the question explicitly states that people will save more because of the govt policy. No need to assume otherwise.
D-Bankers will not lend money. This again is very attractive to be an answer. The only reason, I would discard this because it talks about a specific subset of businesses that need to borrow money. The argument talks about businesses in general.
E-This clearly is not the answer as it would help the govt policy rather than hurting it.

A - The conclusion is based upon availability of funds with banks that businesses can borrow. In this case, people saving more will borrow more, leaving the net close to where it was before the implementation of the govt policy. This is the best answer in my opinion.

Thnanks

Kudos [?]: 101 [1], given: 36

Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 255

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 110

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2011, 09:15
Even I chose C, the wrong answer.

"A" makes more sense than does C. I did ponder over A but hurried ahead. Careless mistake ...
_________________

Consider KUDOS if you feel the effort's worth it

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 110

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 198

Kudos [?]: 384 [1], given: 11

Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
WE: Operations (Insurance)
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2012, 12:29
1
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Businesses are suffering because of a lack of money available for development loans. To help businesses, the
government plans to modify the income-tax structure in order to induce individual taxpayers to put a larger
portion of their incomes into retirement savings accounts, because as more money is deposited in such
accounts, more money becomes available to borrowers.
Which of the following, if true, raises the most serious doubt regarding the effectiveness of the government's
plan to increase the amount of money available for development loans for businesses?
(A) When levels of personal retirement savings increase, consumer borrowing always increases
correspondingly.
(8) The increased tax revenue the government would receive as a result of business expansion would not
offset the loss in revenue from personal income taxes during the first year of the plan.
(e) Even with tax incentives, some people will choose not to increase their levels of retirement savings.
(D) Bankers generally will not continue to lend money to businesses whose prospective earnings are
insufficient to meet their loan repayment schedules.
(E) The modified tax structure would give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for
a given increase in their retirement savings.

Why is E wrong?

Kudos [?]: 384 [1], given: 11

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4488

Kudos [?]: 8741 [6], given: 105

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2012, 17:45
6
KUDOS
Expert's post
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi, there. I'm happy to help with this.

The argument:
Businesses are suffering because of a lack of money available for development loans. To help businesses, the government plans to modify the income-tax structure in order to induce individual taxpayers to put a larger portion of their incomes into retirement savings accounts, because as more money is deposited in such accounts, more money becomes available to borrowers.

In a nutshell --- if we tweak the tax system to encourage folks to put more into their retirement accounts, then presto, more money for loans will be available to business.

Prompt:
Which of the following, if true, raises the most serious doubt regarding the effectiveness of the government's plan to increase the amount of money available for development loans for businesses?

So, which answer effectively says -- make those changes to the tax code, and there won't be as much money for loans available to business?

(A) When levels of personal retirement savings increase, consumer borrowing always increases correspondingly.
OK, so when people put more into their retirement, they wind up borrowing more. That would mean, private citizens en masse would be competing with business for that loan money --- that would mean less money for loans available to business. A possible right answer.

(B) The increased tax revenue the government would receive as a result of business expansion would not offset the loss in revenue from personal income taxes during the first year of the plan.
Making this change to the tax code could wind up hurting the government --- interesting, but not relevant to the argument. The argument is strictly about: will business have more money available for loans? What happens to the government is irrelevant to this argument. (B) is out.

(C) Even with tax incentives, some people will choose not to increase their levels of retirement savings.
This argument above is a macroeconomics argument. It's about changes in the entire tax-system, the entire banking system, etc. Of course, not every private citizen will follow the tax incentive. Tax incentives are given with the idea that only a certain percentage of the population will respond to them. So, some private citizens won't respond to the tax incentive. So what? That's 100% predictable, and not relevant to the big macroeconomic argument at hand. (C) is out.

(D) Bankers generally will not continue to lend money to businesses whose prospective earnings are insufficient to meet their loan repayment schedules.
Well, anyone -- a household or a business --- that fails to meet loan payments is not going to be wildly successful getting more loans. That's pretty obvious. There's absolutely nothing in the original argument suggesting that the businesses discussed are so strapped for money that they all are defaulting on their loans. The business are "struggling" insofar as they can't take out loans to fund R&D, which would grow already thriving businesses. My business is making money already, and I want to to R&D to grow it, but there's no money for loans so I can pursue that R&D --- that's the problem we are addressing, according to the original argument. The problem of some business defaulting on their loans --- that's something separate, not relevant to this argument. (D) is out.

(E) The modified tax structure would give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings.
Again, this is a macroeconomic argument. What matters it the total revenue taken in by the government. Let's say, because of this tax code change, retirement accounts get an additional \$1 billion, and that new money is available for loans to business. That \$1 billion could have come from everybody in the whole socioeconomic spectrum making an equal contribution, or it could have come from rich people putting in much much more than middle class people. From the business standpoint, once they have that \$1 billion available for loans, they don't give a flying figtree where it came from. From the business point of view, it's completely irrelevant how the government goes about raising that money; the specifics of allocation by various socioeconomic classes doesn't matter at all. (E) is out.

Thus, answer (A) is the only one that poses a direct attack on the argument, so that's the answer.

Does that make sense?

Here's another free CR practice question of a similar type.

http://gmat.magoosh.com/questions/1257

The question at that link should be followed by a free video with a complete explanation of the solution, once you submit you answer.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Kudos [?]: 8741 [6], given: 105

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 198

Kudos [?]: 384 [0], given: 11

Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
WE: Operations (Insurance)
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2012, 21:31
Quote:
The modified tax structure would give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings.
Again, this is a macroeconomic argument. What matters it the total revenue taken in by the government. Let's say, because of this tax code change, retirement accounts get an additional \$1 billion, and that new money is available for loans to business. That \$1 billion could have come from everybody in the whole socioeconomic spectrum making an equal contribution, or it could have come from rich people putting in much much more than middle class people. From the business standpoint, once they have that \$1 billion available for loans, they don't give a flying figtree where it came from. From the business point of view, it's completely irrelevant how the government goes about raising that money; the specifics of allocation by various socioeconomic classes doesn't matter at all. (E) is out
E) .

Thanks am just wondering - if the tax incentives are not good enough to incentivise the richer sections who have the means to contribute more, then there is a possibility that the scheme will not collect as much funds thus reducing the loan'ability' ..

Kudos [?]: 384 [0], given: 11

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4488

Kudos [?]: 8741 [3], given: 105

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Feb 2012, 10:42
3
KUDOS
Expert's post
Dear devinawilliam83

That's a good point you make. It's absolutely true that they could do a good job or a not-so-good of designing the tax incentive. It's absolutely true that some not-so-good tax incentive schemes "would give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings." But consider this.

First of all, that information is given in the form of a slope or a function. It's not that everyone, regardless of increase in retirement savings, gets a single flat deduction on their taxes. That's not what it's saying. No, rather, everyone gets the same tax savings for each particular given increase in retirement savings. If two people, at different income levels, increase their retirements the same amount, their taxes are decreased the same amount. That doesn't mean that you can't reduce your taxes more by putting more in retirement. This restraint completely leaves open the possibility of: if you save more, you pay less in taxes. For extreme simplicity, let's say that the function is just a 1-to-1 ratio --- that it, for every dollar I increase my retirement savings, I can deduct that dollar from my taxes. Middle income John Q Public puts an extra \$600 in retirement, and therefore saves \$600 in taxes. If Chester Moneybags also puts an extra \$600 in retirement, he also saves \$600 in taxes, but if he puts an extra \$750,000 in retirement, he saves \$750,000 in taxes. Of course, he would be a fool not to do the latter if he could. Sizable deductions (percentage-wise) are relatively plentiful for folks with low or middle income, but when you get into upper echelons of the tax brackets, getting huge percentage deductions is much trickier. If anything, this scheme could wildly motivate the very rich to shovel money into retirement funds.

It's also true that, designing the tax incentive one way, a lot of the increase in retirement funds would come from the middle class (that could actually be a ton of money, if every single middle income household kicks in). Designing the tax incentive another way, a lot of the increase in retirement funds would come from the super-rich. I'm no expert on tax law, but it seems to me that you have the equal tax break for equal increase in retirement funds thing and still have the incentive slant either way. The point it: as long as they get the money they need, it doesn't matter one whit to the businesses how they do it.

It's 100% true that the tax-incentive plan could be incredibly poorly designed and not accomplish its goal. It's also quite true that it could be a work of sheer genius that works flawlessly, raises even more revenue than expected, and makes everyone happy. Either of those could be the case, and we don't know. Simply from knowing "The modified tax structure would give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings", we have no idea whether it will be a very well designed or very poorly designed tax package.

IN GMAT CR, when you are asked one of these "which most weakens the argument" questions, you can't afford to get into a sea of hypotheticals. "If (E) is true, and then this, and then also that -- then all of that together would hurt the argument" ---- that's not a recipe for success on these question. When you are asked "which most weakens the argument", one of the five really throws a brick through the argument. Here, that's (A): when middle class folks put more in retirement, they borrow more. BAM. Right there, less money for the businesses. No ambiguity, no hypotheticals. If you find an answer choice in which one possible way to interpret it or one possible way to imagine it playing out hurts the argument, that's not it. You want something that needs as little interpretation as possible: just what it says directly hurts the argument.

Does all this make sense? Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Kudos [?]: 8741 [3], given: 105

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 198

Kudos [?]: 384 [0], given: 11

Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
WE: Operations (Insurance)
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Feb 2012, 12:37

Kudos [?]: 384 [0], given: 11

Manager
Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Posts: 63

Kudos [?]: 127 [0], given: 37

Location: Korea, Republic of
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT Date: 08-16-2012
GPA: 3.05
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2012, 20:03
Expert...

I still don't understand why OA is A.
_________________

Luck is the additional surplus on the way to one's constant effort.

Kudos [?]: 127 [0], given: 37

Re: Business are suffering because of a lack of money available for develo   [#permalink] 25 Jun 2012, 20:03

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5    Next  [ 90 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by