Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 28 May 2017, 12:22

### 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

# Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 06 Nov 2010
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 34 [1] , given: 16

Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jan 2011, 07:06
1
KUDOS
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (02:22) correct 44% (01:40) wrong based on 442 sessions

Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for residents of Eastbury is $30,105. 2 years ago, it was 11% lower. This can be directly attributer to the comprehensive set of tax cuts that I helped get approved in congress. Which of the following statements, if true, most strengthens the conclusion drawn by the senator? a) The average per capita after-tax income for the residents of Eastbury who fall below the poverty line increased by 16% in the last 5 years. b) The senator has not personally benefited from the tax cuts. c) The number of residents of Eastbury has not substantially changed in the last two eyars d) The federal tax rate rose 6% during the 4 years prior to the implementation of the tax cuts. e) A recent changes in the estate laws did not substantially increase the average per capita income before-tax income of the residents of Eastbury [Reveal] Spoiler: OA If you have any questions you can ask an expert New! Intern Joined: 06 Nov 2010 Posts: 22 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 16 Re: Average per capita income [#permalink] ### Show Tags 28 Jan 2011, 10:02 praveenvino wrote: Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for residents of Eastbury is$30,105. 2 years ago, it was 11% lower. This can be directly attributer to the comprehensive set of tax cuts that I helped get approved in congress.

Which of the following statements, if true, most strengthens the conclusion drawn by the senator?

a) The average per capita after-tax income for the residents of Eastbury who fall below the poverty line increased by 16% in the last 5 years.
b) The senator has not personally benefited from the tax cuts.
c) The number of residents of Eastbury has not substantially changed in the last two eyars
d) The federal tax rate rose 6% during the 4 years prior to the implementation of the tax cuts.
e) A recent changes in the estate laws did not substantially increase the average per capita income before-tax income of the residents of Eastbury

OA is OK. But can someone explain why it cannot be C?
Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 185
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 20

Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jan 2011, 10:20
I think, it can not be C because the number of residents could have been decreased causing per-capita income to increase and weaking the senator's claim.
Intern
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Posts: 33
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 7

Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2011, 08:07
praveenvino,

It cannot be C because we are talking about per capita income which is the total after tax income divided by the number of people.If the number of people change or remain the same the per capita income will get automatically adjusted. This makes C irrelevant. This is IMHO.

Hope this helps!
Intern
Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

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

Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2011, 23:22
By POE D or E
Choose 'D' by mistake as did not read the choice D properly
'tax rate rose 6% during the 4 years prior to the implementation of the tax cuts' --> talks about period prior to tax cuts, so D is out

It should be 'E' because -- 'recent changes in the estate laws did not substantially ' -- supports the conclusion that the increase should be because of tax cuts ... basically elimination any other cause of income increase before tax that could have led to income increase after tax.
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 903
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 359 [0], given: 123

Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2011, 05:58
bascially no other change brought the result except the tax cuts.
C - makes the average per capital income variable- increasing or decreasing the taxes. Hence it can effect both ways
E - prevents pre taxed per capital income to go up. Hence that should be the assumption and stregthens the senator's conclusion
Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1669
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 103

Kudos [?]: 993 [0], given: 109

Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 May 2011, 14:05
+1 E

If the per capita income before taxes has not changed, this can suggest that the higher per capita incomes after taxes are result of the tax cuts.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1332
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 254 [0], given: 10

Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2011, 00:18
call between C and E, where
C uses a slight assumption that since number of people have decreased,the after tax salary being same,per capita income has increased. avg = Sum/number of people.

E clearly states that the Sum itself has increased,causing the average to increase too.

Hence E.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 628
Followers: 18

Kudos [?]: 241 [0], given: 51

Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2011, 08:12
c states 'The number of residents of Eastbury has not substantially changed in the last two years'

change could mean population increased ( and despite the tax cuts, this could mean the avg.per capita income may decrease, the total income remaining same)
or change could mean population decreased ( in this case avg. per capita income may increase, more with tax cuts , provided the total income of all people remained same)

hence C doesnt necessarily state the truth.
_________________

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.

Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 2004
Concentration: Finance
Followers: 68

Kudos [?]: 643 [0], given: 355

Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jan 2014, 16:42
mcmoorthy wrote:
praveenvino,

It cannot be C because we are talking about per capita income which is the total after tax income divided by the number of people.If the number of people change or remain the same the per capita income will get automatically adjusted. This makes C irrelevant. This is IMHO.

Hope this helps!

Plus we are talking about the number of residents guys, not people who are in the workforce. The argument is too broad and is not as precise as E

Hope it helps to clarify further

Cheers!
J
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10310
Followers: 1000

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 0

Re: Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2015, 08:10
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
VP
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1207
Location: India
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 716 [0], given: 75

Re: Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2015, 00:55
Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for residents of Eastbury is $30,105. 2 years ago, it was 11% lower. This can be directly attributed to the comprehensive set of tax cuts that I helped get approved in congress. Assumptions: only tax cuts are responsible for increase in per capita income and nothing else. Which of the following statements, if true, most strengthens the conclusion drawn by the senator? a) The average per capita after-tax income for the residents of Eastbury who fall below the poverty line increased by 16% in the last 5 years. (this creates a paradox of why it was less 2yrs ago and increased now.) b) The senator has not personally benefited from the tax cuts. (OFS) c) The number of residents of Eastbury has not substantially changed in the last two years. (This can strengthen saying population condition remained same without affecting the percapita income but does not reveal much info.) d) The federal tax rate rose 6% during the 4 years prior to the implementation of the tax cuts. (what happened prior to tax cuts is not necessary.OFS) e) A recent changes in the estate laws did not substantially increase the average per capita income before-tax income of the residents of Eastbury (This supports our assumption that no other changes increased the income except tax cuts) _________________ The only time you can lose is when you give up. Try hard and you will suceed. Thanks = Kudos. Kudos are appreciated http://gmatclub.com/forum/rules-for-posting-in-verbal-gmat-forum-134642.html When you post a question Pls. Provide its source & TAG your questions Avoid posting from unreliable sources. My posts http://gmatclub.com/forum/beauty-of-coordinate-geometry-213760.html#p1649924 http://gmatclub.com/forum/calling-all-march-april-gmat-takers-who-want-to-cross-213154.html http://gmatclub.com/forum/possessive-pronouns-200496.html http://gmatclub.com/forum/double-negatives-206717.html http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-greatest-integer-function-223595.html#p1721773 https://gmatclub.com/forum/improve-reading-habit-233410.html#p1802265 Math Forum Moderator Status: QA & VA Forum Moderator Joined: 11 Jun 2011 Posts: 2696 Location: India GPA: 3.5 WE: Business Development (Commercial Banking) Followers: 111 Kudos [?]: 861 [0], given: 324 Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for [#permalink] ### Show Tags 05 Oct 2015, 11:26 Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for residents of Eastbury is$30,105. 2 years ago, it was 11% lower. This can be directly attributer to the comprehensive set of tax cuts that I helped get approved in congress.

Let Income before Tax be $10000 Tax be$ 1000 ( let Tax rate be 10% )
After tax Income is = $9900 Let there be 10 Residents , so average per capita after-tax income is$ 990 ( 9900/10)

Now comes the catch - 2 years ago, it was 11% lower , it means the After tax Income was 11% of 990 ( average per capita after-tax ) ie $9801.10 The Senator claims that he made comprehensive Tax cuts , so - Lets say he reduced taxes from 15% to 10% ( tax cut by 5%) , considering other factors ( like change in income & change in population ) same the revised calculations are - Income before Tax be$ 10000
Tax be $1500( earlier Tax rate is 15% ) After tax Income is =$8500
Let there be 10 Residents , so average per capita after-tax income is \$ 850 ( 8500/10)

So there is an increase in Per capita Income after tax cuts.

Why E not C ?

C states - The number of residents of Eastbury has not substantially changed in the last two eyars

Substantial change can either be increase or decrease !!

1. If the population increases (Substantially ), then Per Capita after Tax Income will be less/equal/negative
2. If the population decreases (Substantially ), then Per Capita after Tax Income will be More

There are 2 possiibilities for option (C)

E states - A recent changes in the estate laws did not substantially increase the average per capita income before-tax income of the residents of Eastbury

This looks a balanced assumption, there is only one possibility -

1. Moderate increase in average per capita income before-tax - Will lead to an increase in per capita Income after Tax Cuts

Hence I stongly go for (E)
_________________

Thanks and Regards

Abhishek....

PLEASE FOLLOW THE RULES FOR POSTING IN QA AND VA FORUM AND USE SEARCH FUNCTION BEFORE POSTING NEW QUESTIONS

How to use Search Function in GMAT Club | Rules for Posting in QA forum | Writing Mathematical Formulas |Rules for Posting in VA forum | Request Expert's Reply ( VA Forum Only )

Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for   [#permalink] 05 Oct 2015, 11:26
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 For several years, per capita expenditure on prescription 6 26 Sep 2015, 08:19
15 For several years, per capita expenditure on prescription 11 17 Jul 2016, 23:19
For several years, per capita expenditure on prescription 3 01 Jan 2012, 22:45
4 Senator: The average per capita after tax income for 12 08 Jul 2015, 16:28
42 For several years, per capita expenditure on prescription 54 28 Mar 2017, 05:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by