It is currently 23 Jun 2017, 09:12

### 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

# State tax officials, having had considerable success in

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 698

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 19:30
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

55% (01:00) correct 45% (00:53) wrong based on 86 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading delinquent individuals to pay their back taxes through the incentive of reduced penalties, plan to adopt a similiar approach in order to collect past due taxes from corporations.

The state tax plan outlined above assumes that

A) federal tax officials will not attempt to collect back taxes in the same manner
B) stiff fines are not the only way to collect past due corporate taxes
C) corporations tend to be delinquent in their taxes for teh same length of time that individual taxpayers are
D) past due taxes cannot be collected without a reduction in penalties
E) penalties for delinquent corporations will have to be reduced by the same percentage as were penalties for delinquent individuals.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 483
Location: Chicago

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 20:05
IMO D
_________________

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1710
Re: CR: State Tax Officials [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 20:08
Go with B. however D is also likely.
Manager
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 214

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 20:23
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 279
Location: CA, USA

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 20:41
D

If there is alternative other than reducing tax penality and still collect past due tax, the state official would have done it already.
Director
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 718

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2005, 08:02
Agree with D..

There a double dose of this choice in the argument. It has been applied twice. One for corporations and now for individuals. There is no other method that is working for the officials.
Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 198
Location: Ghana

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2005, 08:05
D for me too.
_________________

It's not over until it's OVER!

Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 557

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2005, 08:30
(C) for me.
Reason: What applies to individuals also applies to corporations (that's the assumption).
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2005
Posts: 86

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2005, 11:36
B fits perfectly when negated. D is not that necessary. The stimulus says considerable success in persuading but not necessarily 100% guaranteed that the government will collect taxes.
Director
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 718

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2005, 05:29
Carloz wrote:
B fits perfectly when negated. D is not that necessary. The stimulus says considerable success in persuading but not necessarily 100% guaranteed that the government will collect taxes.

I dont see a single word that mentions about "FINES". The argument is talking about penalties.

The author has shown that state has been successful in collecting the back taxes when they reduce the penalties. Now the state is trying to use the same method for individuals.

The author assumes that the only way to collect back taxes is to reduce the penalties. if it were not the case, then individuals and corporations would had paid the taxes or state would had used some other tools to get the money back from these thieves.

So, the argument cannot stand without assuming D
Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 331

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2005, 07:40
I agree. D.

GA
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2005
Posts: 86

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2005, 08:38
Conclusion is "the plan to adopt a similar approach in order to collect past due taxes from corporations."

B negated is stiff fines are the ONLY way to collect past due corporate taxes. When B is negated, the conclusion cannot be true. Thus B must be an assumption. Why use reduced penalties when the only way to collect corporate taxes is through stiff fines?

What is OA?
Manager
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 76

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2005, 21:21
I'll pick C.

Since, most have picked D, I'll wait for OA to see if I am correct.
Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2004
Posts: 137

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2005, 09:57
Agree with D....

But yes I did get inclined to choose B....My qs for Riteshgupta.....if D used 'FINES' and B used 'penalties' would the answer pick be affected?
_________________

Thanks!

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5043
Location: Singapore

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2005, 23:44
Premise:
1) State tax officials had success in getting delinquent individuals to pay back taxes
2) Used incentive of reduced penalties
3) plans to use similar approach to colllect past taxes from coporations

The state tax plan outlined above assumes that

A) federal tax officials will not attempt to collect back taxes in the same manner
- out of scope. Federal tax officials is never discussed in the passage

B) stiff fines are not the only way to collect past due corporate taxes
- Not important.

C) corporations tend to be delinquent in their taxes for the same length of time that individual taxpayers are
- Again, it's not important. It does not link the premises to the conclusion that the plan will be equally successful when applied to coporates

D) past due taxes cannot be collected without a reduction in penalties
- I'll go with D. it assumes that this is the only way to get past taxes paid

E) penalties for delinquent corporations will have to be reduced by the same percentage as were penalties for delinquent individuals.
- Not important.

D for me.
Director
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 698

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2005, 18:51
OA is B. I feel for "D", just like everyone else.

Carloz, could you elaborate on why you picked B over D?
Manager
Joined: 07 Jun 2005
Posts: 90

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2005, 00:06
do we assume fines=penalties here?
My answer was D as well. whats the OE?
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1801

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2005, 18:15
I got B.
Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2004
Posts: 137

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2005, 19:35
Explanation why B makes sense:

"plans to adopt similar approach" does not mean same approach.
_________________

Thanks!

Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2005
Posts: 86

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2005, 13:10
The conlcusion is that state officials plan to use reduction in penalties as a way to collect past due taxes. No where in the whole passage states that this must be the only way to collect taxes (which is what D is saying). Also, the reduction of penalties "had considerable success" but not absolute 100% guaranteed success rate. In fact you can have stiff fines and reduce penalties concurrently and the argument still holds. D is too absolute to be the answer.

B must be a premise/assumption b/c if negated then it would say: stiff fines are the only way to collect past taxes. The argument cannot be true if this were the case.
31 Aug 2005, 13:10

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 28 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
A new state-sponsored tax law aimed at increasing the state’s college 5 30 May 2017, 00:04
6 Sales of microwave ovens have increased considerably over the last 5 22 Mar 2017, 10:11
8 Because the government of Laconia provided considerable tax 11 17 Feb 2017, 09:15
8 State tax officials, having had considerable success in 21 02 Mar 2016, 09:09
57 Exports of United States wood pulp will rise considerably 55 30 Dec 2015, 01:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by