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

It is currently 18 Jun 2018, 20:07

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

4 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Posts: 138
Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2010, 10:32
4
10
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  35% (medium)

Question Stats:

69% (01:22) correct 31% (01:25) wrong based on 1206 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any employees for the cost of owning and operating a private aircraft that is used for business purposes. Thus, many American companies themselves purchase private aircraft. The vast majority of the business aviation fleet is owned by small and mid-size businesses, and flights are strictly for business purposes, with mostly mid-level employees on board. These companies and their boards of directors are in full compliance with the law and with what is best for their businesses.

Which of the following can be most properly inferred from the statements above?

A) The Federal law in question costs businesses money.
B) Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines.
C) Large businesses usually have their executives fly first or business class on commercial flights.
D) Upper level executives are less often in compliance with the law.
E) By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 403
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2010, 10:55
Its between A & E.
rest all can be ignored.

A incorrect --> no evidence about relative costs.

E correct -- > the executives following the company's guidelines also are fully complying with the law.

It's clearly stated that mid level employees use flights owned by the business

Hope this helps ~~~
_________________

GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...

3 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Dec 2009
Posts: 198
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2010, 12:24
3
A) The Federal law in question costs businesses money.
-- Though the federal law in question initially cost money to the business, eventually its beneficial for the business. They save money since they don't have to reimburse the money to their employees. Hence A is not a correct answer choice.

B) Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines.
-- New information. Hence B cannot be a correct answer choice.

C) Large businesses usually have their executives fly first or business class on commercial flights.
-- Nothing is mentioned about the large businesses. Hence C is a not a correct answer choice.

D) Upper level executives are less often in compliance with the law.
-- Nothing is mentioned about upper level executives. Hence D cannot be a correct answer choice.

E) By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law.
-- This is a correct answer choice. Since most mid-level executives travel in company's private jet, according to law they are not supposed to be reimbursed their money.
Thank You.

Thanks,
Akhil M.Parekh
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 221
Schools: Sloan R1, McCombs R1, Ross R1 (w/int), Haas R2, Kellogg R2
WE 1: Product Engineering/Manufacturing
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2010, 12:38
I didn't like E. Why would an employee be reimbursed for a flight on a company-owned plane?

(I can see how it is the best choice in this case, however.)
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1358
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2010, 12:49
michigancat wrote:
I didn't like E. Why would an employee be reimbursed for a flight on a company-owned plane?

(I can see how it is the best choice in this case, however.)


Right...I got stuck on this point alone... I chose E by POE because all the others were not making any sense.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Dec 2009
Posts: 198
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2010, 12:53
michigancat,

In GMAT we always have to assume the premise put forward by author is correct. Author has its own reasoning. Here the assumption is - employee is supposed to pay for his travels to the company if he is using company's private jet. Though in real world this might not make sense.

I hope I was able to clear your doubts atleast to some extent. Thank You.

Thanks,
Akhil M.Parekh
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 132
GMAT 2: 740 Q51 V38
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jun 2010, 08:27
amp0201 wrote:
michigancat,

In GMAT we always have to assume the premise put forward by author is correct. Author has its own reasoning. Here the assumption is - employee is supposed to pay for his travels to the company if he is using company's private jet. Though in real world this might not make sense.

I hope I was able to clear your doubts atleast to some extent. Thank You.

Thanks,
Akhil M.Parekh

But the laws just prohibit reimbursement of an employee's jet, not of the company's jet!
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1298
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jul 2010, 17:28
It is between A and E because B, C and D bring outside information.

Nothing is mentioned about costs in the argument.

Hence E.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 192
Location: Boston
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2010, 10:56
2
Tricky one. (E).

tingle15 wrote:
Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any employees for the cost of owning and operating a private aircraft that is used for business purposes. Thus, many American companies themselves purchase private aircraft. The vast majority of the business aviation fleet is owned by small and mid-size businesses, and flights are strictly for business purposes, with mostly mid-level employees on board. These companies and their boards of directors are in full compliance with the law and with what is best for their businesses.

Which of the following can be most properly inferred from the statements above?

A) The Federal law in question costs businesses money. Nothing in the law forces the businesses to pay anything - in fact, all it does is PROHIBIT them from paying money.
B) Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines. No info is given on the preferences of executives.
C) Large businesses usually have their executives fly first or business class on commercial flights. The passage states that most private airplanes are owned by small/medium businesses, so this is trying to trick you into thinking that executives of large businesses must fly commercially (since their businesses don't buy private planes). But there's nothing that prevents those executives from owning their own planes - as long as they aren't reimbursed for them. Also, they could fly coach.
D) Upper level executives are less often in compliance with the law. Again trying to trick you - because most flights are made by mid-level executives, upper level executives must be getting reimbursed. Again wrong, for similar reasons to (C).
E) By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law. This one tries to trick you with its wording. The law prohibits reimbursements for the employees' own planes, not the business's planes - so at a glance, this might seem irrelevant. But that's the point. It doesn't matter whether they receive reimbursements for these flights, because the planes in question don't fall under the law. So reimbursements or not, the executives on board are complying with the law.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: ISB, Hyderabad
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 156
WE 1: 4 years Software Product Development
WE 2: 3 years ERP Consulting
Re: CR: Federal law [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Oct 2010, 17:20
E for me. As this was an inference question and we need to find something which valid and yet not in argument, I was debating between B & E.

B) Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines.
E) By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law.

Eliminated B based on additional information related to commercial airlines.
_________________

-AD

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 May 2013
Posts: 51
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jun 2013, 05:08
Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any employees for the cost of owning and operating a private aircraft that is used for business purposes. Thus, many American companies themselves purchase private aircraft. The vast majority of the business aviation fleet is owned by small and mid-size businesses, and flights are strictly for business purposes, with mostly mid-level employees on board. These companies and their boards of directors are in full compliance with the law and with what is best for their businesses.



It is been clearly stated that what is best for businesses and therefore
it must be true that they don't have problem with the law
if they would have problem then it would not be best for their businesses
4 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Jun 2012
Posts: 21
Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Nov 2013, 21:04
4
3
Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any employees for the cost of owning and operating a private aircraft that is used for business purposes. Thus, many American companies themselves purchase private aircraft. The vast majority of the business aviation fleet is owned by small and mid-size businesses, and flights are strictly for business purposes, with mostly mid-level employees on board. These companies and their boards of directors are in full compliance with the law and with what is best for their businesses. Which of the following can be most properly inferred from the statements above?
• The Federal law in question costs businesses money.
• Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines.
• Large businesses usually have their executives fly first or business class on commercial flights.
• Upper level executives are less often in compliance with the law.
• By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law.
_________________

If questions jerk in your mind, then give me a KUDOS

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Posts: 144
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Nov 2013, 19:09
1
This inference question combines two of the premises in the stimulus. The first is sentence one: "Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any employees for the cost of owning and operating a private aircraft that is used for business purposes." The second is the last sentence: "These companies and their boards of directors are in full compliance with the law and with what is best for their businesses."

If these employees are in full compliance with the law, and law prohibits employees from being reimbursed, then these employees must not be being reimbursed. This is answer choice E.

I hope this helps!!!
_________________

Brandon
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

If you found this post helpful, please give me kudos!!! :)

Save $100 on Veritas Prep GMAT Courses And Admissions Consulting
Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 401
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Dec 2013, 16:36
tingle15 wrote:
Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any employees for the cost of owning and operating a private aircraft that is used for business purposes. Thus, many American companies themselves purchase private aircraft. The vast majority of the business aviation fleet is owned by small and mid-size businesses, and flights are strictly for business purposes, with mostly mid-level employees on board. These companies and their boards of directors are in full compliance with the law and with what is best for their businesses.

Which of the following can be most properly inferred from the statements above?

A) The Federal law in question costs businesses money.
B) Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines.
C) Large businesses usually have their executives fly first or business class on commercial flights.
D) Upper level executives are less often in compliance with the law.
E) By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law.
I didn't select E because I thought though board of directors could be in full compliance of Law(Federal Law/State Law/Church Law/abcd Law etc etc)[as per last statement], it was never mentioned that mid-level employees on board are in compliance with every law. Is this line of thinking wrong to discard E that E didn't specify the law boundaries specifically for mid-level employees?

I selected A because it implicitly specified that the boundaries of Law(Federal in this case). The businesses will definitely be purchasing private aircrafts as per the second statement(highlighted above). How could this option be wrong?
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 333
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Jan 2014, 08:51
1
Due to Federal law companies tells its employee ---- If you use your own aircraft for business purpose you wont get reimbursement....probably because reimbursement will be higher than economy class ticket on commercial airline...

Instead, many American companies themselves purchase private aircraft. You can't be paid reimbursement for what you have'nt spent....

so i dont violate the law for receiving free ride and not receiving reimbursement...rightfully so as i don't have any bills to put my claim....

WHAT CAN BE INFERRED......
A) The Federal law in question costs businesses money. In a long run ...this arrangement may be cheaper....INCORRECT
B) Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines. ...WHO KNOW'S? INCORRECT
C) Large businesses usually have their executives fly first or business class on commercial flights. ...NOWHERE INFERRED... INCORRECT...
D) Upper level executives are less often in compliance with the law. ........NOWHERE INFERRED... INCORRECT...
E) By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law.... CORRECT....


KUDOS IF YOU PLEASE....
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 22 Feb 2016
Posts: 99
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Healthcare
GMAT 1: 690 Q42 V47
GMAT 2: 710 Q47 V39
GPA: 3.57
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Dec 2016, 00:20
seekmba wrote:
It is between A and E because B, C and D bring outside information.

Nothing is mentioned about costs in the argument.

Hence E.



Agreed!

I used the same methodology. However I totally fail to understand how can Manhatten put up such a low quality question
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2010
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jan 2017, 23:23
According to the statements, the companies that own private aircraft for business use are fully in compliance with the relevant law, which is summarized. A correct
inference will be a statement that must follow from at least part of the premises given.
(A) It does not have to be true that the law costs the businesses money, as no evidence about the relative costs is given.
(B) This choice is an irrelevant comparison, as the preferences of the executives are not the concern of the statements.
(C) This choice does not have to follow, as there is no information given about the travel arrangements made by large companies. The statements only indicate
that the majority of private planes are not owned by large companies.
(D) There is no information given about the travel arrangements of upper level executives and no reason to believe that those with the companies discussed do not comply with their companies’ policies.
(E) If, as the statements indicate, the companies are in full compliance with this law, it must be true that the executives following their guidelines also are. - Correct

Answer E
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 07 Aug 2016
Posts: 88
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Operations
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V35
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Telecommunications)
Reviews Badge
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Sep 2017, 02:43
VeritasPrepBrandon wrote:
This inference question combines two of the premises in the stimulus. The first is sentence one: "Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any employees for the cost of owning and operating a private aircraft that is used for business purposes." The second is the last sentence: "These companies and their boards of directors are in full compliance with the law and with what is best for their businesses."

If these employees are in full compliance with the law, and law prohibits employees from being reimbursed, then these employees must not be being reimbursed. This is answer choice E.

I hope this helps!!!



HI Can you please explain what the question means. I am unable to comprehend the the passage.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 25 Jan 2018
Posts: 73
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
WE: Business Development (Other)
CAT Tests
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 May 2018, 09:26
A) The Federal law in question costs businesses money. ... we cant say that. May be the cost will be more in reimbursement option.
B) Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines. .. not relevant
C) Large businesses usually have their executives fly first or business class on commercial flights.... out of scope
D) Upper level executives are less often in compliance with the law... we cant say this
E) By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law.... this is the correct answer

Sent from my SM-G955F using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Re: Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any   [#permalink] 25 May 2018, 09:26
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.