RudrAkshat7
can anyone explain why option 3 is correct?
The question stem claims that if fair were to discontinue having food vendors, waveton’s revenue from the restaurant tax would decline by about $20,000. The concern is revenue from RESTAURANT TAX. When restaurant’s tax can reduce ? if people do not eat at restaurant. So answer choice should have characteristics that by some means eating at restaurant/food vendor in totality is reducing. And this option/scenario must be true.
Option A : Providing appropriate facilities for the food vendors at the crafts fair is irrelevant to the revenue from restaurant tax. There is no any connection to it.
Option B : Attendance at the crafts fair would not decline significantly if there were no food vendors there. This option has a problem. If people do not attend fair but go to other restaurant to eat rather than eating at food vendors then also Restaurant tax revenue will not decrease.
Option C : The option choice means that if hardly anyone who is visiting fair goes to outside restaurant to eat food, then those people’s food expenses would contribute very less to the restaurant tax. Hence, restaurant tax would decline by about $20,000. Hence, C is correct answer.
Option D : What ever is mentioned in the passage is to be considered correct. Doubting the accuracy is weakening the claim but it is not always true. If the sales figures are not accurately reported, it could be higher or lower in value. Do not give clear answer that Restaurant tax revenue will reduce.
Option E : Option says that Average_price(at food vendors)<< Average_price(at restaurants in waveton). In this case, when food vendors are not allowed to operate(discontinue) at fair, people may go to outside restaurants in waveton town where more tax will be charged because of higher price of food(assuming taxation rate remains constant), the tax revenue infact will increase.