It is currently 18 Nov 2017, 03:43

### 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

# The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 541 [0], given: 0

The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Mar 2009, 01:55
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

89% (01:09) correct 11% (00:02) wrong based on 32 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to subtract advertising expenses from their revenues in calculating taxable income. Tobacco companies would then have to pay more taxes. As a consequence, they would raise the prices of their products and this price increase would raise the prices of their products and this price increase would discourage tobacco use.

Which of the following is an additional premise required by the argument above?
(A) Tobacco companies would not offset the payment of extra taxes by reducing costs in other areas.
(B) Tobacco companies would not continue to advertise if they were forced to pay higher taxes.
(C) People would not continue to buy tobacco products if these products were no longer advertised.
(D) The money the government would gain as a result of the increase in tobacco companies’ taxable income would be used to educate the
public about the dangers of tobacco use.
(E) The increase in taxes paid by tobacco companies would be equal to the additional income generated by raising prices.

Kudos [?]: 541 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 893

Kudos [?]: 765 [0], given: 17

Re: CR : tobacco companies [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Mar 2009, 04:19
Good Q
I feel its A

Say , you are the CEO of Tobacco company
yr corporate Income Tax go up

Conclusion saying "Co. would raise the prices of their products and this price increase would discourage tobacco use."
assuming that "(A) Tobacco companies would not offset the payment of extra taxes by reducing costs in other areas."

dont know abt E though
_________________

http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

Kudos [?]: 765 [0], given: 17

Manager
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 133

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 0

Re: CR : tobacco companies [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Mar 2009, 06:07
I would feel A too.

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 634

Kudos [?]: 647 [0], given: 6

Re: CR : tobacco companies [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Mar 2009, 11:16
ritula wrote:
The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to subtract advertising expenses from their revenues in calculating taxable income. Tobacco companies would then have to pay more taxes. As a consequence, they would raise the prices of their products and this price increase would raise the prices of their products and this price increase would discourage tobacco use.

Which of the following is an additional premise required by the argument above?
(A) Tobacco companies would not offset the payment of extra taxes by reducing costs in other areas.
- Yes, if they offset the extra cost, price wont increase.
(B) Tobacco companies would not continue to advertise if they were forced to pay higher taxes.
- But they can still rise the price and stop advertising. hence no help
(C) People would not continue to buy tobacco products if these products were no longer advertised.
- OOS
(D) The money the government would gain as a result of the increase in tobacco companies’ taxable income would be used to educate the public about the dangers of tobacco use.
- OOS
(E) The increase in taxes paid by tobacco companies would be equal to the additional income generated by raising prices.

_________________

If You're Not Living On The Edge, You're Taking Up Too Much Space

Kudos [?]: 647 [0], given: 6

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 541 [0], given: 0

Re: CR : tobacco companies [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Mar 2009, 21:15
YEs OA is A. Thanks 2 all.

Kudos [?]: 541 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 855

Kudos [?]: 502 [0], given: 7

Re: CR : tobacco companies [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Mar 2009, 00:15
Good question. Agree with A.
This is an assumption or strengthen question.

Kudos [?]: 502 [0], given: 7

Director
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 634

Kudos [?]: 647 [0], given: 6

Re: CR : tobacco companies [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Mar 2009, 06:00
I guess it's an assumption question though the "additional premises" in question stem generally refers to Strengthen type. Logically assumption, justify and strengthen questions are similar in their types. In all three types we find the justification to hold the conclusion firmly.
_________________

If You're Not Living On The Edge, You're Taking Up Too Much Space

Kudos [?]: 647 [0], given: 6

Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2008
Posts: 150

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 8

Re: CR : tobacco companies [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Oct 2009, 00:05
priyankur_saha@ml.com wrote:
I guess it's an assumption question though the "additional premises" in question stem generally refers to Strengthen type. Logically assumption, justify and strengthen questions are similar in their types. In all three types we find the justification to hold the conclusion firmly.

I think it should be the assumption question too because it asks to fill the gap in the reasoning (additional premise). A is correct ans because "subtract advertising expenses from their revenues" is equal to "reducing costs in other areas" to reduce the taxable income

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 8

Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Posts: 121

Kudos [?]: 194 [0], given: 3

Re: CR : tobacco companies [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Oct 2009, 07:10
agree with A.

Kudos [?]: 194 [0], given: 3

Intern
Status: Durham
Affiliations: AIChE, AAEES, EIT
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 13

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 19

Location: United States (NC)
GPA: 3.8
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2011, 18:37
Good explanation priyankur. Thx.
_________________

Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever. (Gandhi)

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 19

Director
Status: Enjoying the GMAT journey....
Joined: 26 Aug 2011
Posts: 713

Kudos [?]: 588 [0], given: 264

Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q49 V24
Re: The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2011, 23:53
+1 A
_________________

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.

A WAY TO INCREASE FROM QUANT 35-40 TO 47 : http://gmatclub.com/forum/a-way-to-increase-from-q35-40-to-q-138750.html

Q 47/48 To Q 50 + http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-final-climb-quest-for-q-50-from-q47-129441.html#p1064367

Three good RC strategies http://gmatclub.com/forum/three-different-strategies-for-attacking-rc-127287.html

Kudos [?]: 588 [0], given: 264

BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 888

Kudos [?]: 734 [0], given: 44

Location: Viet Nam
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Re: The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2011, 01:53
The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to subtract advertising expenses from their revenues in calculating taxable income. Tobacco companies would then have to pay more taxes. As a consequence, they would raise the prices of their products and this price increase would raise the prices of their products and this price increase would discourage tobacco use.

Which of the following is an additional premise required by the argument above?
(A) Tobacco companies would not offset the payment of extra taxes by reducing costs in other areas. => this is the answer. If tobacco companies offset the payment of extra taxes by reducing costs in other area. They will no longer increase price that offer to regular customer
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Kudos [?]: 734 [0], given: 44

Manager
Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 169

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 6

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V37
Re: The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Dec 2011, 12:08
A

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 6

Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 255

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 110

Re: The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2012, 02:08
A is the clear answer here. If tobacco companies reduce costs in other areas, then the companies will still have some money to advertise and thus, the use of tobacco will not be discouraged.
_________________

Consider KUDOS if you feel the effort's worth it

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 110

Director
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 518

Kudos [?]: 304 [0], given: 16

Location: United States
GPA: 3.86
WE: Accounting (Commercial Banking)
Re: The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2012, 06:16
with A
_________________

Kudos [?]: 304 [0], given: 16

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2010
Posts: 280

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 1

Re: The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jan 2012, 01:12
+1 for A

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 1

Re: The government should stop permitting tobacco companies to   [#permalink] 05 Jan 2012, 01:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by