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

 It is currently 15 Jul 2018, 19:41

### 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

# Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Retired Moderator
Joined: 02 Oct 2009
Posts: 545
GMAT 1: 530 Q47 V17
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36

### Show Tags

Updated on: 26 May 2018, 05:20
2
1
Question 1
00:00

Question Stats:

81% (02:21) correct 19% (01:48) wrong based on 322

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00

Question Stats:

48% (00:42) correct 52% (00:33) wrong based on 331

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00

Question Stats:

74% (00:23) correct 26% (00:13) wrong based on 317

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 4
00:00

Question Stats:

50% (00:38) correct 50% (00:30) wrong based on 304

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 5
00:00

Question Stats:

64% (00:31) correct 36% (00:37) wrong based on 297

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 6
00:00

Question Stats:

52% (00:41) correct 48% (00:33) wrong based on 285

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 7
00:00

Question Stats:

48% (00:27) correct 52% (00:31) wrong based on 285

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 8
00:00

Question Stats:

71% (00:53) correct 29% (01:00) wrong based on 263

### HideShow timer Statistics

The Official Guide for GMAT Review, 10th Edition, 2003

Practice Question
Question No.: RC 55 ~ 60
Page: 338

The Official Guide for GMAT Review 11th Edition, 2005

Practice Question
Question No.: RC 58 ~ 63
Page: 369

Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by foreign governments. Another 340 charge that foreign companies “dumped” their products in the United States at “less than fair value.” Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief.

Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research relationships. The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company.

Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports—and that the United States company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad—the United States company’s products will be uncompetitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties.

Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The “United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the “Canadian” companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt.

1. The passage is chiefly concerned with

(A) arguing against the increased internationalization of United States corporations
(B) warning that the application of laws affecting trade frequently has unintended consequences
(C) demonstrating that foreign-based firms receive more subsidies from their governments than United States firms receive from the United States government
(D) advocating the use of trade restrictions for “dumped” products but not for other imports
(E) recommending a uniform method for handling claims of unfair trade practices

2. It can be inferred from the passage that the minimal basis for a complaint to the International Trade Commission is which of the following?

(A) A foreign competitor has received a subsidy from a foreign government.
(B) A foreign competitor has substantially increased the volume of products shipped to the United States.
(C) A foreign competitor is selling products in the United States at less than fair market value.
(D) The company requesting import relief has been injured by the sale of imports in the United States.
(E) The company requesting import relief has been barred from exporting products to the country of its foreign competitor.

3. The last paragraph performs which of the following functions in the passage?

(A) It summarizes the discussion thus far and suggests additional areas of research.
(B) It presents a recommendation based on the evidence presented earlier.
(C) It discusses an exceptional case in which the results expected by the author of the passage were not obtained.
(D) It introduces an additional area of concern not mentioned earlier.
(E) It cites a specific case that illustrates a problem presented more generally in the previous paragraph.

4. The passage warns of which of the following dangers?

(A) Companies in the United States may receive no protection from imports unless they actively seek protection from import competition.
(B) Companies that seek legal protection from import competition may incur legal costs that far exceed any possible gain.
(C) Companies that are United States-owned but operate internationally may not be eligible for protection from import competition under the laws of the countries in which their plants operate.
(D) Companies that are not United States-owned may seek legal protection from import competition under United States import relief laws.
(E) Companies in the United States that import raw materials may have to pay duties on those materials.

5. The passage suggests that which of the following is most likely to be true of United States trade laws?

(A) They will eliminate the practice of “dumping” products in the United States.
(B) They will enable manufacturers in the United States to compete more profitably outside the United States.
(D) Those that help one unit within a parent company will not necessarily help other units in the company.
(E) Those that are applied to international companies will accomplish their intended result.

6. It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following about the complaint mentioned in the last paragraph?

(A) The ITC acted unfairly toward the complainant in its investigation.
(B) The complaint violated the intent of import relief laws.
(C) The response of the ITC to the complaint provided suitable relief from unfair trade practices to the complainant.
(D) The ITC did not have access to appropriate information concerning the case.
(E) Each of the companies involved in the complaint acted in its own best interest.

7. According to the passage, companies have the general impression that International Trade Commission import relief practices have

(A) caused unpredictable fluctuations in volumes of imports and exports
(B) achieved their desired effect only under unusual circumstances
(C) actually helped companies that have requested import relief
(D) been opposed by the business community
(E) had less impact on international companies than the business community expected

8. According to the passage, the International Trade Commission is involved in which of the following?

(A) Investigating allegations of unfair import competition
(B) Granting subsidies to companies in the United States that have been injured by import competition
(C) Recommending legislation to ensure fair
(D) Identifying international corporations that wish to build plants in the United States
(E) Assisting corporations in the United States that wish to compete globally

Originally posted by RaviChandra on 29 Apr 2010, 04:17.
Last edited by hazelnut on 26 May 2018, 05:20, edited 3 times in total.
Formatted the question & added the OA
Retired Moderator
Joined: 02 Oct 2009
Posts: 545
GMAT 1: 530 Q47 V17
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Apr 2010, 04:18
OA
BDEDDBCA
Senior Manager
Status: Yeah well whatever.
Joined: 18 Sep 2009
Posts: 326
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 660 Q42 V39
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
GPA: 3.49
WE: Analyst (Insurance)
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Apr 2010, 08:04
bdeddbea

needless to say i got one wrong. but hey. only God's perfect. sheesh
_________________

He that is in me > he that is in the world. - source 1 John 4:4

Manager
Joined: 28 Aug 2009
Posts: 166
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Apr 2010, 05:02
alright..couldsomeone explain more about 5th question
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 144
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: UCLA (Anderson) - Class of 2014
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V35
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2012, 03:21
sasen wrote:
alright..couldsomeone explain more about 5th question

Here's the relevant part that address the 5th question: "The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company."

So the right answer is D.

B and C are out of scope.

A is not proven in the passage.
A: Trade laws "address", not "eliminate" dumping (this verbal is too strong and confirmative as trade laws might not succeed in eliminating dumping yet).

E is wrong: the passage says that application of trade laws might have unintended consequences, because international companies use trade laws against U.S. companies that have production bases abroad and given privileges by foreign governments.
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 144
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: UCLA (Anderson) - Class of 2014
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V35
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2012, 03:24
For question 1:

1. The passage is chiefly concerned with
(A) arguing against the increased internationalization of United States corporations
(B) warning that the application of laws affecting trade frequently has unintended consequences
(C) demonstrating that foreign-based firms receive more subsidies from their governments than United States firms receive from the United States government
(D) advocating the use of trade restrictions for “dumped” products but not for other imports
(E) recommending a uniform method for handling claims of unfair trade practices

B is the most correct one. But I still think that it is not quite right because it violates the "too narrow/ too broad scope" criteria.

The passage specifically deals with "import reliefs policies" while for choice B, it addresses "laws affecting trade", which is much more general than "import reliefs policies".

Can anybody explain?
Intern
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Posts: 33
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Mar 2014, 21:49
What was your timing on this. I got all right, but took 11 mins.
Manager
Joined: 03 May 2015
Posts: 93
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2015, 18:54
Got all correct when i was completely depressed about my performance. Got some of my confidence back.. took 13 Min.. should reduce more.
Intern
Status: Engineering consultant
Joined: 13 Jul 2014
Posts: 17
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V32
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Sep 2015, 23:43
Can anyone xplain me question number 6 ?
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1321
Location: Malaysia
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2017, 20:03
GMATNinja, Could you help with Question 6?
Quote:
Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The “United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the “Canadian” companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt.

It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following about the complaint mentioned in the last paragraph?

(A) The ITC acted unfairly toward the complainant in its investigation.
(B) The complaint violated the intent of import relief laws.
(C) The response of the ITC to the complaint provided suitable relief from unfair trade practices to the complainant.
(D) The ITC did not have access to appropriate information concerning the case.
(E) Each of the companies involved in the complaint acted in its own best interest.
_________________

"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”

"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."

GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1821
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2017, 19:03
hazelnut wrote:
GMATNinja, Could you help with Question 6?
Quote:
Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The “United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the “Canadian” companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt.

It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following about the complaint mentioned in the last paragraph?

(A) The ITC acted unfairly toward the complainant in its investigation.
(B) The complaint violated the intent of import relief laws.
(C) The response of the ITC to the complaint provided suitable relief from unfair trade practices to the complainant.
(D) The ITC did not have access to appropriate information concerning the case.
(E) Each of the companies involved in the complaint acted in its own best interest.

Quote:
Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect.

This portion suggests that author believes that the import relief laws were designed to protect American companies from foreign competition. In this particular example (the complaint mentioned in the last paragraph), a Dutch company used the laws to file a complaint against an American company. Instead of the laws being used to protect American companies, in this example the laws were used against an American company.

Now, let's take a look at the answer choices:

Quote:
(A) The ITC acted unfairly toward the complainant in its investigation.

All we know is that the ITC investigated these allegations. We do not know how the ITC responded to the complaints, so we do not know whether the ITC acted unfairly. (A) can be eliminated.

Quote:
(B) The complaint violated the intent of import relief laws.

The author believes that the import relief laws were designed to protect American companies, but in this example the laws were used against an American company. Thus, we can infer that the author would believe that the complaint violated the intent of the import laws. Choice (B) looks good.

Quote:
(C) The response of the ITC to the complaint provided suitable relief from unfair trade practices to the complainant.

Again, we do not know how the ITC responded to the complaint, so we cannot infer what the author might think about the response. Eliminate (C).

Quote:
(D) The ITC did not have access to appropriate information concerning the case.

We are not told anything about the ITC's access to appropriate information concerning the case, so we cannot infer that the author would believe this. Eliminate (D).

Quote:
(E) Each of the companies involved in the complaint acted in its own best interest.

The passage does not mention anything about the motivation of the companies, so we cannot infer what the author thinks about the motivations of the companies. We can only infer what the author thinks about the complaint itself. (E) can be eliminated.

(B) is the best choice.

I hope that helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

Manager
Joined: 02 May 2016
Posts: 82
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship
GRE 1: 317 Q163 V154
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2017, 07:19
hazelnut

Could you chip in on Question 2
Question 2:
2. It can be inferred from the passage that the minimal basis for a complaint to the International Trade Commission is which of the following?

(C) A foreign competitor is selling products in the United States at less than fair market value.
(D) The company requesting import relief has been injured by the sale of imports in the United States.

Passage says:
Quote:
Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief.

I rejected D as there is no mention of "injured by sale of imports".
Thus ended up selecting B.
Why is B wrong? Why is D correct?

Thanks!
Intern
Joined: 01 Oct 2017
Posts: 1
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2017, 01:51
It can be inferred from the passage that the minimal basis for a complaint to the International Trade Commission is
which of the following?
(A) A foreign competitor has received a subsidy from a foreign government.
(B) A foreign competitor has substantially increased the volume of products shipped to the United States.
(C) A foreign competitor is selling products in the United States at less than fair market value.
(D) The company requesting import relief has been injured by the sale of imports in the United States.
(E) The company requesting import relief has been barred from exporting products to the country of its foreign
competitor.
Then why the answer is D not E? I could not navigate the proof for the answer. Thank you for your help!
Intern
Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 5
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2017, 03:56
Pls dont give spoilers at the top of the quesn..keep it at the bottom

Sent from my ASUS_Z010D using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1196
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: 314 Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2017, 10:33
1
Hi can anyone help me with question 7
. According to the passage, companies have the general impression that International Trade Commission import relief practices have

(A) caused unpredictable fluctuations in volumes of imports and exports
(B) achieved their desired effect only under unusual circumstances
(C) actually helped companies that have requested import relief
(D) been opposed by the business community
(E) had less impact on international companies than the business community expected

I chose E .
Please explain the reasoning why C is correct
_________________

Manager
Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 67
Location: India
GMAT 1: 510 Q46 V17
WE: Web Development (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2017, 21:43
2
hazelnut wrote:
GMATNinja, Could you help with Question 6?
Quote:
Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The “United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the “Canadian” companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt.

It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following about the complaint mentioned in the last paragraph?

(A) The ITC acted unfairly toward the complainant in its investigation.
(B) The complaint violated the intent of import relief laws.
(C) The response of the ITC to the complaint provided suitable relief from unfair trade practices to the complainant.
(D) The ITC did not have access to appropriate information concerning the case.
(E) Each of the companies involved in the complaint acted in its own best interest.

64. The passage is chiefly concerned with
(A) arguing against the increased internationalization of United States corporations
(B) warning that the application of laws affecting trade frequently has unintended consequences
(C) demonstrating that foreign-based firms receive more subsidies from their governments than United States firms receive from the United States government
(D) advocating the use of trade restrictions for "dumped" products but not for other imports
(E) recommending a uniform method for handling claims of unfair trade practices
Main idea
To answer this question, consider the passage as a
whole. In the first sentence, the author sets off
unfortunately in commas, drawing attention to the
author's attitude about companies that seek legal
protection from imports. In the next paragraph,
the author says, this questfor import relief has hurt
more companies than it has helped. The third
paragraph creates a hypothetical situation to show
how import relief might hurt American
companies, and the last paragraph shows the
actual, unintended, and unfortunate consequences
of import relief laws.
A Internationalization is accepted as a given
(lines 16-18); no argument is made against
it.
B Correct. The author warns that American
companies seeking relief from imports may
when the laws are applied to them.
C The author does not make this comparison.
D The author does not make this
recommendation.
E The author makes no recommendation but
simply describes actual and possible
consequences.

65. It can be inferred from the passage that the minimal
basis for a complaint to the International Trade
Commission is which of the following?
(A) A foreign competitor has received a subsidy
from a foreign government.
(B) A foreign competitor has substantially increased
the volume of products shipped to the United
States.
(C) A foreign competitor is selling products in the
United States at less than fair market value.
(D) The company requesting import relief has been
injured by the sale of imports in the United
States.
(E) The company requesting import relief has been
barred from exporting products to the country
of its foreign competitor.
Inference
To make an inference about the minimal basis for
complaints. The first paragraph describes two
specific kinds of complaints the International
from imports that benefitfrom subsidies by foreign
governments and damage from imports dumped
at less than fair value. The author contends that
companies would complain even without any
specific basis. In the current climate promoting
import relief, the simple claim that an industry has
been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek
relief Complaints are reviewed even when the
complaining firm does not allege that dumping
occurred—simply that the imports damaged its
competitiveness.
A This specific complaint is explicitly referred
to in lines 4—7, but there is no suggestion
that it is the minimal basis.
B The scenario of a large increase in exports is
not discussed in the passage.
C This specific complaint is explicitly referred
to in lines 8—10, but there is no suggestion
that it is the minimal basis.
D Correct. Lines 10-13 show that merely
claiming to be injured by imports is enough
for a company to seek relief that is, to
complain to the ITC.
E This possibility is not discussed in the
passage.

66. The last paragraph performs which of the following
functions in the passage?
(A) It summarizes the discussion thus far and
(B) It presents a recommendation based on the
evidence presented earlier.
(C) It discusses an exceptional case in which the
results expected by the author of the passage
were not obtained.
(D) It introduces an additional area of concern not
mentioned earlier.
(E) It cites a specific case that illustrates a problem
presented more generally in the previous
paragraph.
Logical structure
The first sentence of the last paragraph identifies
its function when it introduces the most brazen
case; this is a paragraph that will give an example.
To discover what this most brazen case exemplifies,
go back to the previous paragraph, where lines
22-25 provide a general statement about the
danger of import laws being used against the
companies the laws are supposed to protect. The
last paragraph offers a specific example of the
problem that is treated generally and
hypothetically in the third paragraph.
A It gives an example; it does not summarize.
B It presents a specific case, not a
recommendation.
C It does discuss an exceptional case, but the
author is using the case to illustrate
consequences that the passage has already
predicted could occur.
D The last paragraph is discussing the same
area of concern as the one discussed in the
rest of the passage.
E Correct. A potential danger of import laws,
discussed hypothetically in the third
paragraph, is illustrated by an actual case in
the final paragraph.

67. The passage warns of which of the following dangers?
(A) Companies in the United States may receive no
protection from imports unless they actively
seek protection from import competition.
(B) Companies that seek legal protection from
import competition may incur legal costs that
far exceed any possible gain.
(C) Companies that are United States owned but
operate internationally may not be eligible for
protection from import competition under the
laws of the countries in which their plants
operate.
(D) Companies that are not United States owned
may seek legal protection from import
competition under United States import
relief laws.
(E) Companies in the United States that import raw
materials may have to pay duties on those
materials.
Supporting ideas
The passage as a whole warns against the
potential dangers of import laws. Specifically, it
points in lines 22-25 to the danger that foreign
companies will use import relief laws against the very
companies the laws were designed to protect. This
specific danger is discussed at length in the third
and fourth paragraphs.
A The passage does not discuss this situation.
B The passage does not discuss this situation.
C The passage does not discuss this situation.
D Correct. Foreign companies with operations
in the United States may use the import
relief laws to the detriment of American
companies that have operations outside the
United States.
E The passage does not discuss this situation.

68. The passage suggests that which of the following is
most likely to be true of United States trade laws?
(A) They will eliminate the practice of "dumping"
products in the United States.
(B) They will enable manufacturers in the United
States to compete more profitably outside the
United States.
more negatively than trade with other nations.
(D) Those that help one unit within a parent
company will not necessarily help other units in
the company.
(E) Those that are applied to international
companies will accomplish their intended result.
Inference
The use of suggests indicates that the answer is
probably not directly stated in the passage. The
second paragraph explains that global operations
increase the complexity of a corporation's
relationships, and this intricate web of
relationships makes it unlikely that a system of
import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all
the units under the same parent company. This
laws may help one unit within a parent company,
but not necessarily others.
A The passage does not suggest that dumping
will be eliminated.
B The passage does not discuss this alternative.
C The passage offers no evidence—even in its
final paragraph—to support this inference.
D Correct. The passage conveys this
information in other words.
E Lines 22-25 contend the reverse:
Internationalization increases the likelihood
that invoking import laws will have
unintended consequences.

69. It can be inferred from the passage that the author
believes which of the following about the complaint
mentioned in the last paragraph?
(A) The ITC acted unfairly toward the complainant in
its investigation.
(B) The complaint violated the intent of import
relief laws.
(C) The response of the ITC to the complaint
provided suitable relief from unfair trade
practices to the complainant.
information concerning the case.
(E) Each of the companies involved in the complaint
acted in its own best interest.
Inference
An inference requires going beyond the material
explicitly stated in the passage. Reread the last
paragraph to see what the author says about that
specific complaint. In that case, a foreign
competitor with American operations was seeking
relief in these laws: The bizarre aspect of the
complaint was that a foreign conglomerate ... was
crying for help against a United States company. The
first sentence of the passage suggests that the
author believes firms in the United States are
making excessive use of trade-protection law. It
does not suggest that the author opposes all trade-
protection law—only that the laws should be used
prudently, and in a manner consistent with their
intended purpose. Lines 22-25 suggest that the
author believes import relief laws are supposed to
be protecting American companies from foreign
competitors. The reader can infer that the author
believes that the intent of these laws—the
protection of American companies—is violated
in the example described in the final paragraph.
A The passage gives no information about how
the ITC acted.
B Correct. The author believes that the laws
are supposed to protect American
companies; the author's point in the final
paragraph is that a foreign company may in
fact invoke those laws against an American
company.
C The passage does not reveal the ITC's
response to the complaint.
D The passage does not discuss the ITC's
E The inference concerns what the author
thinks about the complaint itself rather than
about the motivation of the companies.
_________________

-Yuvaraj
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Stop searching someone to motivate you.

GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1821
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Oct 2017, 09:35
1
Nam Vu wrote:
2. It can be inferred from the passage that the minimal basis for a complaint to the International Trade Commission is
which of the following?
(A) A foreign competitor has received a subsidy from a foreign government.
(B) A foreign competitor has substantially increased the volume of products shipped to the United States.
(C) A foreign competitor is selling products in the United States at less than fair market value.
(D) The company requesting import relief has been injured by the sale of imports in the United States.
(E) The company requesting import relief has been barred from exporting products to the country of its foreign
competitor.
Then why the answer is D not E? I could not navigate the proof for the answer. Thank you for your help!

The first paragraph describes two types of unfair practices addressed by the ITC: 1) those involving damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by foreign governments and 2) foreign companies dumping products in the United States at “less than fair value.” At the end of the paragraph, the author states: "Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds (i.e. a sufficient basis) to seek relief."

Thus, even if unfair practices (such as the two described earlier in the first paragraph) are not taking place, a company can seek relief as long as it can claim that its "industry has been injured by imports." This minimal basis for a complaint to the ITC is accurately described in choice (D).

As for choice (E), the passage does not describe ITC involvement in cases when companies are barred from exporting products to the country of its foreign competitors. Even if those companies could seek relief from the ITC is such cases, the passage does not suggest that this is the "minimal basis" for making a complaint to the ITC.

arvind910619 wrote:
Hi can anyone help me with question 7
. According to the passage, companies have the general impression that International Trade Commission import relief practices have

(A) caused unpredictable fluctuations in volumes of imports and exports
(B) achieved their desired effect only under unusual circumstances
(C) actually helped companies that have requested import relief
(D) been opposed by the business community
(E) had less impact on international companies than the business community expected

I chose E .
Please explain the reasoning why C is correct

Refer to the first sentence of the second paragraph: "Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped." This suggests that the "general impression" is that the quest for import relief has HELPED more companies than it has hurt. The passage does not talk about the business community's expectations specific to the impact on international companies, so choice (E) can be eliminated.

Choice (C) most closely matches the general impression suggested by the first sentence of the second paragraph.

I hope this helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 156
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Copenhagen, ESMT"19
GPA: 3.75
WE: Consulting (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2017, 05:36
Hi can anyone help me with question 7
. According to the passage, companies have the general impression that International Trade Commission import relief practices have

(A) caused unpredictable fluctuations in volumes of imports and exports
(B) achieved their desired effect only under unusual circumstances
(C) actually helped companies that have requested import relief
(D) been opposed by the business community
(E) had less impact on international companies than the business community expected

I chose E .
Please explain the reasoning why C is correct
Re: Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for   [#permalink] 29 Oct 2017, 05:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 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®.