Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Nov 1912:30 PM EST
-01:30 PM EST
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
08 Jul 2025, 13:37
Kudos
Bookmarks
To encourage economic development in remote regions, the federal government pays regional governments a bonus based on the total volume of goods delivered to businesses within their region. A shipping company proposes building a national distribution hub in one such region, routing most national shipments through the hub before final delivery elsewhere. In exchange, the company requests a share of the bonuses, arguing that the regional government would greatly profit from the substantial increase in shipment volume.
"In exchange, the company requests a share of the bonuses, arguing that the regional government would greatly profit from the substantial increase in shipment volume."
So, the argument says that the regional government will have a substantial increase in shipment volume.
The company’s argument depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Without the proposed hub, most shipments would bypass the remote region entirely.
Yes, it's a assumption. If most of the shipments would already be passing through the region, the new hub would not bring a really meaningful impact to the government (nor have leverage to negotiate) and then would not achieve the argument "would greatly profit from the substantial increase in shipment volume.".
(B) The federal government awards bonuses based on total shipment volume passing through a region, not just on shipments delivered locally.
In a first moment I got tempted with this answer choice. But the stem already states "a bonus based on the total volume of goods delivered to businesses within their region". Since stem should be taken as true, we do not need to "assume". Wrong option choice.
(C) The regional government would only share bonuses if the new hub directly benefited local businesses.
It is not a assumption that the argument depends. The new hub could "indirectly" benefits the local business (or can not benefit at all), it is not really related with the argument. Wrong option choice.
(D) Routing shipments through the new hub would not make delivery times longer than shipping via current routes.
It is not a assumption that the argument depends. The new hub could even double the delivery time, it is not really related with the argument. Wrong option choice.
(E) Businesses in the remote region currently account for a small proportion of the shipping company’s national shipments.
It is not a assumption that the argument depends. It is not really related with the argument. Wrong option choice.
Answer = A
"In exchange, the company requests a share of the bonuses, arguing that the regional government would greatly profit from the substantial increase in shipment volume."
So, the argument says that the regional government will have a substantial increase in shipment volume.
The company’s argument depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Without the proposed hub, most shipments would bypass the remote region entirely.
Yes, it's a assumption. If most of the shipments would already be passing through the region, the new hub would not bring a really meaningful impact to the government (nor have leverage to negotiate) and then would not achieve the argument "would greatly profit from the substantial increase in shipment volume.".
(B) The federal government awards bonuses based on total shipment volume passing through a region, not just on shipments delivered locally.
In a first moment I got tempted with this answer choice. But the stem already states "a bonus based on the total volume of goods delivered to businesses within their region". Since stem should be taken as true, we do not need to "assume". Wrong option choice.
(C) The regional government would only share bonuses if the new hub directly benefited local businesses.
It is not a assumption that the argument depends. The new hub could "indirectly" benefits the local business (or can not benefit at all), it is not really related with the argument. Wrong option choice.
(D) Routing shipments through the new hub would not make delivery times longer than shipping via current routes.
It is not a assumption that the argument depends. The new hub could even double the delivery time, it is not really related with the argument. Wrong option choice.
(E) Businesses in the remote region currently account for a small proportion of the shipping company’s national shipments.
It is not a assumption that the argument depends. It is not really related with the argument. Wrong option choice.
Answer = A
MBAChaser123
Joined: 19 Nov 2024
Last visit: 14 Nov 2025
Posts: 86
Given Kudos: 7
Location: United States
Schools: Broad'26 (WL) Ross '26 (S)
GMAT Focus 1: 695 Q88 V83 DI82 
GPA: 3
08 Jul 2025, 14:26
Kudos
Bookmarks
We can use a negation test for assumption questions. If the negated answer choice breaks the argument, then it is a necessary assumption.
(A) Without the proposed hub, most shipments would bypass the remote region entirely.
Negation: Without the proposed hub, most shipments go through the remote region entirely.
This kinda weakens the argument, but it doesn't break it. The hub can still increase the shipments, and so increase the bonuses.
(B) The federal government awards bonuses based on total shipment volume passing through a region, not just on shipments delivered locally.
Negation: The award bonuses are only for shipments delivered locally.
This breaks the argument. If the award is only for what is delivered to businesses inside the region, then the shipment passing through the hub does not qualify for bonuses at all, so an increase in its volume does not affect the bonuses.
So this is the correct answer choice.
(C) The regional government would only share bonuses if the new hub directly benefited local businesses.
Negation: The regional government would share bonuses even if the new hub doesn't directly benefit local businesses
This does break the argument at all. If anything, it strengthens it, which means the answer choice weakens the argument, and is not an assumption.
(D) Routing shipments through the new hub would not make delivery times longer than shipping via current routes.
Negation: Routing shipments through the new hub would make delivery times longer than shipping via current routes.
This does not break the argument. The delivery time is irrelevant to the argument and had no effect on the bonuses or shipment volume.
(E) Businesses in the remote region currently account for a small proportion of the shipping company’s national shipments
Negation: Businesses in the remote region currently account for a big proportion of the shipping company’s national shipments
This does not break the argument. It suggests that shipping volume is already big, but it does not say it can't increase, so the argument could still stand.
The answer is B.
(A) Without the proposed hub, most shipments would bypass the remote region entirely.
Negation: Without the proposed hub, most shipments go through the remote region entirely.
This kinda weakens the argument, but it doesn't break it. The hub can still increase the shipments, and so increase the bonuses.
(B) The federal government awards bonuses based on total shipment volume passing through a region, not just on shipments delivered locally.
Negation: The award bonuses are only for shipments delivered locally.
This breaks the argument. If the award is only for what is delivered to businesses inside the region, then the shipment passing through the hub does not qualify for bonuses at all, so an increase in its volume does not affect the bonuses.
So this is the correct answer choice.
(C) The regional government would only share bonuses if the new hub directly benefited local businesses.
Negation: The regional government would share bonuses even if the new hub doesn't directly benefit local businesses
This does break the argument at all. If anything, it strengthens it, which means the answer choice weakens the argument, and is not an assumption.
(D) Routing shipments through the new hub would not make delivery times longer than shipping via current routes.
Negation: Routing shipments through the new hub would make delivery times longer than shipping via current routes.
This does not break the argument. The delivery time is irrelevant to the argument and had no effect on the bonuses or shipment volume.
(E) Businesses in the remote region currently account for a small proportion of the shipping company’s national shipments
Negation: Businesses in the remote region currently account for a big proportion of the shipping company’s national shipments
This does not break the argument. It suggests that shipping volume is already big, but it does not say it can't increase, so the argument could still stand.
The answer is B.
Bunuel
lvillalon
Joined: 29 Jun 2025
Last visit: 25 Aug 2025
Posts: 88
Given Kudos: 14
Location: Chile
Concentration: Operations, Entrepreneurship
Schools: HEC Sept '26 INSEAD Aug '26 IMD'26 Rotterdam'26 Booth '26 Sloan '26 Kellogg '26 Anderson '26
GPA: 3,3
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Schools: HEC Sept '26 INSEAD Aug '26 IMD'26 Rotterdam'26 Booth '26 Sloan '26 Kellogg '26 Anderson '26
Posts: 88
08 Jul 2025, 18:17
Kudos
Bookmarks
(A) Might be, since that would reinforce the importance of the hub, but it's way less important than B.
(B) This is vital, else the regional gov wouldn't get the bonus. CORRECT ANSWER
(C) This asusmption would disencourage the company, since it couldn't expect benefits.
(D) Not necessarily important, the bonus could be bigger than the losses for extended delivery times.
(E) Not related at all to the bonus.
(B) This is vital, else the regional gov wouldn't get the bonus. CORRECT ANSWER
(C) This asusmption would disencourage the company, since it couldn't expect benefits.
(D) Not necessarily important, the bonus could be bigger than the losses for extended delivery times.
(E) Not related at all to the bonus.
Bunuel
