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

It is currently 09 Dec 2019, 18:44

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 169
State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 26 May 2018, 09:50
3
1
41
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

37% (01:54) correct 63% (01:51) wrong based on 828 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 similar 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 the 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

Originally posted by bschool83 on 21 Jul 2011, 16:10.
Last edited by Bunuel on 26 May 2018, 09:50, edited 2 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
V
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9859
Location: Pune, India
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 May 2017, 21:44
8
5
gmataquaguy wrote:
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.


Responding to a pm:

Plan:
State has had considerable success in collecting individuals' back taxes through reduced penalties incentive.
It intends to do the same with corporations.

We need to find an assumption - something that is required to make this plan work.

A) federal tax officials will not attempt to collect back taxes in the same manner
We don't need to worry about what federal tax officials may do. It is irrelevant to our argument.

B) stiff fines are not the only way to collect past due corporate taxes
This NEEDS to be correct for our plan to work. We plan to give reduced penalties incentive i.e. we plan to reduce stiff fines. If stiff fines were the only way to collect past due corporate taxes, then our plan will fail. We have to assume that past due taxes can be collected without stiff fines too. And hence this is the answer.

C) corporations tend to be delinquent in their taxes for teh same length of time that individual taxpayers are
The length of time for which the back taxes are due has not been discussed anywhere and has no relevance to our argument. We are concerned about reducing penalties.

D) past due taxes cannot be collected without a reduction in penalties
We do not NEED this for our plan to be successful. It is not a necessary condition. Think of it this way. I have a problem A - (back taxes). I decide to solve it by using solution B (reduce stiff penalties). For my plan to succeed, is it necessary that B is the ONLY solution to A? No. There could be ten other solutions - C, D etc. I chose to use B as a solution but it needn't be the only solution for B to be successful. Hope you see why (D) is not correct.

E) penalties for delinquent corporations will have to be reduced by the same percentage as were penalties for delinquent individuals.
We don't need to assume this. We might be able to make the plan work with a smaller cut in the fines or might need to bigger cut for the corporations.

Answer (B)
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
General Discussion
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 169
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2011, 17:29
Evidence: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading delinquent individuals to pay their back taxes through the incentive of reduced penalties.

Conclusion: Tax officials plan to apply a similar approach to collect taxes from corporations.

Since, this plan is plan is more successful than the previously used tax collection method, one can assume that there are more than one tax collection methods. Answer choice B summarizes this point well.
Director
Director
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 695
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Oct 2011, 21:02
3
Argument is simple and answer choices are simple too. We do not spend a lot of time to understand argument and answer choices as the case with long and complex argument.

However, this is hard. Unlike SUPPORTER ASSUMPTION, which can be realize when we read answer choices, DEFENDER ASSUMPTION is hard to realize and so requires us to negate each answer choice to find the defender assumption. This process of negation takes more time than the process of finding supporter assumption.

Mode to tack : for assumption question, when we finish reading 5 answer choices and see nothing, it is defender assumption question and we have to think of negation of each answer choice.

logic of CR is simple to understand the explanation. But the problem is that we find out the method of attacking for each kind of question so that we do not miss the hard questions next time. I wish you to share your ideas. I am highly interested in discussion of gmatprep questions because gmatprep is official source of hard questions.
Director
Director
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 695
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Oct 2011, 22:02
members, pls, discuss

it is clear that B is correct. But I want to discuss why many persons choose D. in fact, D makes me uncomfortable.

I see many questions in gmatprep, which contain answer choice like D and which makes me uncomfortable.

The test maker fully understand that he/she make us hard with D and I want to understand the way test maker make D. I want to know clue/method to realize the wrongness of D so that next time we can be easy with D.

D makes us think that negation of D weakens the argument but the negation dose not. Is this what the test maker want?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Jan 2011
Posts: 9
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Schools: HKUST, ISB
GMAT Date: 11-20-2011
GPA: 3.6
WE: Business Development (Other)
Reviews Badge
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Oct 2011, 20:02
thangvietnam wrote:
members, pls, discuss

it is clear that B is correct. But I want to discuss why many persons choose D. in fact, D makes me uncomfortable.

I see many questions in gmatprep, which contain answer choice like D and which makes me uncomfortable.

The test maker fully understand that he/she make us hard with D and I want to understand the way test maker make D. I want to know clue/method to realize the wrongness of D so that next time we can be easy with D.

D makes us think that negation of D weakens the argument but the negation dose not. Is this what the test maker want?


We are looking for answer choice which eliminates possible reason which could attack the argument...and the author assumes that such a possible reason does not exit.

We may use the Negation technique to examine options B and D

Option D negated - past due taxes can be collected without a reduction in penalties...this does not weaken the argument

Option B negated - stiff fines are the only way to collect past due corporate taxes....this attacks the arguments... reducing penalties will be an incentive to persuade delinquent individuals to pay taxes

Hope this helps!
Director
Director
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 695
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2011, 03:02
2
concept of defender assumption and supporter assumption is developed in GMAT CRITICAL REASOING BIBLE. Not all of the book is good.

I want to share with you more.

For assumption, strengthening and weakening questions, the wrong answer choices which RESTATES EVIDENCE or CONTRADICTS EVIDENCE are very tricky. practice to realize these wrong answer choices is very helpfull because many trap answer choices hinge on the 2 concept. For more understanding, do searching RESTATE EVIDENCE/ CONTRADICT EVIDENCE in this forum in which I post some comment.

looking answer choices under the light of RESTATE /CONTRADICT EVIDENCE help us understand argument better.
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 01 Aug 2014
Posts: 36
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Mar 2016, 09:09
1
B) stiff fines are not the only way to collect past due corporate taxes. It strengthens the argument that the government can use another way to collect past due corporate such as reduce fines. Negating it, stiff fines are the only way to collect past due corporate taxes. It weakens the conclusion, since the plan of the government will be not effective.
IIMA, IIMC School Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1370
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Other)
CAT Tests
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 May 2017, 04:42
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
gmataquaguy wrote:
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.


Responding to a pm:

Plan:
State has had considerable success in collecting individuals' back taxes through reduced penalties incentive.
It intends to do the same with corporations.

We need to find an assumption - something that is required to make this plan work.

A) federal tax officials will not attempt to collect back taxes in the same manner
We don't need to worry about what federal tax officials may do. It is irrelevant to our argument.

B) stiff fines are not the only way to collect past due corporate taxes
This NEEDS to be correct for our plan to work. We plan to give reduced penalties incentive i.e. we plan to reduce stiff fines. If stiff fines were the only way to collect past due corporate taxes, then our plan will fail. We have to assume that past due taxes can be collected without stiff fines too. And hence this is the answer.

C) corporations tend to be delinquent in their taxes for teh same length of time that individual taxpayers are
The length of time for which the back taxes are due has not been discussed anywhere and has no relevance to our argument. We are concerned about reducing penalties.

D) past due taxes cannot be collected without a reduction in penalties
We do not NEED this for our plan to be successful. It is not a necessary condition. Think of it this way. I have a problem A - (back taxes). I decide to solve it by using solution B (reduce stiff penalties). For my plan to succeed, is it necessary that B is the ONLY solution to A? No. There could be ten other solutions - C, D etc. I chose to use B as a solution but it needn't be the only solution for B to be successful. Hope you see why (D) is not correct.

E) penalties for delinquent corporations will have to be reduced by the same percentage as were penalties for delinquent individuals.
We don't need to assume this. We might be able to make the plan work with a smaller cut in the fines or might need to bigger cut for the corporations.

Answer (B)


Thanks Karishma, I have a small query though. Doesn't assumption have to bring in new information?
+1 Kudos for your explanation for incorrect option D. Cheers. 8-)
_________________
It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.

Feeling stressed, you are not alone!!
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
V
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9859
Location: Pune, India
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 May 2017, 10:26
adkikani wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
gmataquaguy wrote:
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.


Responding to a pm:

Plan:
State has had considerable success in collecting individuals' back taxes through reduced penalties incentive.
It intends to do the same with corporations.

We need to find an assumption - something that is required to make this plan work.

A) federal tax officials will not attempt to collect back taxes in the same manner
We don't need to worry about what federal tax officials may do. It is irrelevant to our argument.

B) stiff fines are not the only way to collect past due corporate taxes
This NEEDS to be correct for our plan to work. We plan to give reduced penalties incentive i.e. we plan to reduce stiff fines. If stiff fines were the only way to collect past due corporate taxes, then our plan will fail. We have to assume that past due taxes can be collected without stiff fines too. And hence this is the answer.

C) corporations tend to be delinquent in their taxes for teh same length of time that individual taxpayers are
The length of time for which the back taxes are due has not been discussed anywhere and has no relevance to our argument. We are concerned about reducing penalties.

D) past due taxes cannot be collected without a reduction in penalties
We do not NEED this for our plan to be successful. It is not a necessary condition. Think of it this way. I have a problem A - (back taxes). I decide to solve it by using solution B (reduce stiff penalties). For my plan to succeed, is it necessary that B is the ONLY solution to A? No. There could be ten other solutions - C, D etc. I chose to use B as a solution but it needn't be the only solution for B to be successful. Hope you see why (D) is not correct.

E) penalties for delinquent corporations will have to be reduced by the same percentage as were penalties for delinquent individuals.
We don't need to assume this. We might be able to make the plan work with a smaller cut in the fines or might need to bigger cut for the corporations.

Answer (B)


Thanks Karishma, I have a small query though. Doesn't assumption have to bring in new information?
+1 Kudos for your explanation for incorrect option D. Cheers. 8-)


Yes, an assumption has to bring in new information. The argument does not give you "stiff fines are not the only way to collect past due CORPORATE taxes". It is new information. We assume this, plan accordingly and hope that our plan works.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 12 Jul 2017
Posts: 216
Schools: NUS '22 (S)
GMAT 1: 570 Q43 V26
GMAT 2: 660 Q48 V34
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jun 2019, 03:52
Hello VeritasKarishma ma'am,

Thanks for the explanation on option D.

Could you please help me with below two queries on Option D:
i) Option D talks about in general paying back taxes -> And this option directly contradicts with the plan government used on individuals ( so it can be opted out) -> Is this proper reason to reject this answer?

ii) Officials assume that reducing penalties is SUFFICIENT for the collection of back taxes and thus there can be other SUFFICIENT conditions as well for the taxes to be paid back.

Had this option been -> payment of back corporation taxes DO NOT require any other thing than reducing penalties.
Would this bolded part qualify as assumption? I came up with this assumption while predicting an answer after reading the argument.

Regards,
Rishav
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
V
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9859
Location: Pune, India
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Jun 2019, 03:56
1
rish2708 wrote:
Hello VeritasKarishma ma'am,

Thanks for the explanation on option D.

Could you please help me with below two queries on Option D:
i) Option D talks about in general paying back taxes -> And this option directly contradicts with the plan government used on individuals ( so it can be opted out) -> Is this proper reason to reject this answer?

ii) Officials assume that reducing penalties is SUFFICIENT for the collection of back taxes and thus there can be other SUFFICIENT conditions as well for the taxes to be paid back.

Had this option been -> payment of back corporation taxes DO NOT require any other thing than reducing penalties.
Would this bolded part qualify as assumption? I came up with this assumption while predicting an answer after reading the argument.

Regards,
Rishav


(i) is not a proper reason to reject (D). "How to collect past due taxes" is the question. (D) also talked about that only.
(D) says that the ONLY solution is reducing penalties. That needn't be true. There could be other ways too.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 26 Aug 2017
Posts: 52
Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: HBS '21
WE: Management Consulting (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Nov 2019, 07:27
These questions usually fall under what would be called "They have a plan" questions, and the questions always almost follow the same pattern.

Someone will propose a certain course of action (here as "adopt a similar approach ") and outlines a pretty specific aim of that course of action (here "in order to collect past due taxes from corporations"). The right answer will almost always be directly related to the specific aim of the plan, which tells us that's the part of the question we should zoom in on.

We are looking for an answer that refers back to the content of the plan i.e. penalties, and corporate taxes. We are looking for a missing, unstated piece of info that tells us INDEED it is possible to reduce penalties for corporates. Only Choice B states so, citing an example of what must be true in order for the conclusion to hold true.

If stiff fines ARE the only way, then the argument about using a similar approach that's different in form but akin in principles to deal with corporates will fall apart. This is why B is the answer.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del   [#permalink] 24 Nov 2019, 07:27
Display posts from previous: Sort by

State tax officials, having had considerable success in persuading del

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne