Last visit was: 19 May 2026, 08:22 It is currently 19 May 2026, 08:22
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
505-555 (Easy)|   Complete the Passage|                        
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,251
Own Kudos:
329
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,251
Kudos: 329
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods 17 Jan 2023, 15:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avigutman

What do you think of this answer choice, jabhatta2:
(G) most of the increase in goods shipped was in goods that were being transported within the same company rather than sold, and therefore were unaffected by tariffs.

Posted from my mobile device
Show more

Hi avigutman – yes (option G) would be answer better than (option B)

Because with (option G) , you can definitely say - Correlation DOES NOT MEAN Causation

Below is why.

avigutman
So, if A=tariff reduction, B=doubling the amount shipped, and C=doubling the sales of goods.
Although B happened in the year after A happened[raising the possibility that A caused B], it does not follow that A caused C.
Show more

With (Option G) -- you will eliminate the possibility of the (pink)

So if [A=tariff reduction] actually didn't even CAUSE [B=increasing the amount shipped] to begin with -

What possibility is it that [A=tariff reduction] caused [C=sales of goods]

A bit lower.
User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,285
Own Kudos:
916
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,285
Kudos: 916
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods 17 Jan 2023, 15:55
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
avigutman

What do you think of this answer choice, jabhatta2:
(G) most of the increase in goods shipped was in goods that were being transported within the same company rather than sold, and therefore were unaffected by tariffs.

Posted from my mobile device

Hi avigutman – yes (option G) would be answer better than (option B)

Because with (option G) , you can definitely say - Correlation DOES NOT MEAN Causation

Below is why.

avigutman
So, if A=tariff reduction, B=doubling the amount shipped, and C=doubling the sales of goods.
Although B happened in the year after A happened[raising the possibility that A caused B], it does not follow that A caused C.

With (Option G) -- you will eliminate the possibility of the (pink)

So if [A=tariff reduction] actually didn't even CAUSE [B=increasing the amount shipped] to begin with -

What possibility is it that [A=tariff reduction] caused [C=sales of goods]

A bit lower.
Show more
Can you articulate the difference between (B) and (G), jabhatta2?
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,251
Own Kudos:
329
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,251
Kudos: 329
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods 18 Jan 2023, 07:27
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avigutman

Can you articulate the difference between (B) and (G), jabhatta2?
Show more

Hi avigutman - Listed out (Option B) vs (Option G) below

The only difference really is (Option G) has the phrase “unaffected by tariffs”

In (B) – there is **very small assumption**, which is -- companies are doing the blue action ORGANICALLY (Whether tariffs are low or whether tariffs are high)

Quote:


(B) most of the increase in goods shipped by United States companies to Mexico was in parts shipped to the companies’ newly relocated subsidiaries for assembly and subsequent shipment back to the United States

(G) most of the increase in goods shipped was in goods that were being transported within the same company rather than sold, and therefore were unaffected by tariffs
Show more
User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,285
Own Kudos:
916
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,285
Kudos: 916
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods 18 Jan 2023, 07:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
In (B) – there is **very small assumption**, which is -- companies are doing the blue action ORGANICALLY (Whether tariffs are low or whether tariffs are high)
Show more
I think the missing piece for you, jabhatta2, is that the blue action wouldn't be subject to tariffs by definition (just look up the definition of tariffs). In other words, the phrase "unaffected by tariffs" is implied.
User avatar
MS61
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2022
Last visit: 03 Jan 2026
Posts: 98
Own Kudos:
48
Given Kudos: 124
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 605 Q84 V76 DI80
GMAT 1: 540 Q45 V27
GMAT Focus 1: 605 Q84 V76 DI80
GMAT 1: 540 Q45 V27
Posts: 98
Kudos: 48
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods 18 Mar 2025, 17:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The arguments says that from US to Mexico: Quantity of shipment increased (US exports to Mexico increased because of import export tax reduction) say from 100 to 200 Nos, But the same reason did not increase the sales of these imported items in Mexico, the sales remained 100 Nos. so the question is 200 parts were imported to Mexico from US & like last year 100 Nos were sold to Mexico customers but what happened with the remaining 100 Nos ? Because: Option B

(A) many of the United States companies that produced goods that year had competitors based in Mexico that had long produced the same kind of goods: Incorrect, we are talking about US products that are being shipped to Mexico and not simply produced.

(B) most of the increase in goods shipped by United States companies to Mexico was in parts shipped to the companies’ newly relocated subsidiaries for assembly and subsequent shipment back to the United States - Correct, answers about the reasoning about the pending 100 Nos

(C) marketing goods to a previously unavailable group of consumers is most successful when advertising specifically targets those consumers, but developing such advertising often takes longer than a year : Incorrect - Generic statement

(D) the amount of Mexican goods shipped to the United States remained the same as it had been before the tariff reductions: Incorrect - This is reverse talk. We want US to Mexico shipment status

(E) there was no significant change in the employment rate in either of the countries that year­ :Incorrect - Irrelevant, we want US to Mexico shipment status
User avatar
si.alaoui
User avatar
Joined: 08 Dec 2023
Last visit: 16 Mar 2026
Posts: 8
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 8
Kudos: 0
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods 05 Jan 2026, 10:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A : Increase in shipments from USA to Mexico X2
B : reduced tariffs
it does not follow that the reduction in tariffs caused the sales of United States goods to companies and consumers in Mexico to double that year
NEGATING B : reduced tariffs => A : Increase in shipments from USA to Mexico X2
the question is why A happened ?

In an other words : WHY the increase in goods shipped by United States to Mexico IRRELEVANT OF reduced tariffs ?


Most of the increase in goods shipped by United States companies to Mexico was in parts shipped to the companies’ newly relocated subsidiaries for assembly and subsequent shipment back to the United States. MAKES SENS

BillyZ
Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the politician's argument?

United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods shipped to Mexico doubled in the year after tariffs on trade between the two countries were reduced, it does not follow that the reduction in tariffs caused the sales of United States goods to companies and consumers in Mexico to double that year, because __________.

(A) many of the United States companies that produced goods that year had competitors based in Mexico that had long produced the same kind of goods

(B) most of the increase in goods shipped by United States companies to Mexico was in parts shipped to the companies’ newly relocated subsidiaries for assembly and subsequent shipment back to the United States

(C) marketing goods to a previously unavailable group of consumers is most successful when advertising specifically targets those consumers, but developing such advertising often takes longer than a year

(D) the amount of Mexican goods shipped to the United States remained the same as it had been before the tariff reductions

(E) there was no significant change in the employment rate in either of the countries that year­

Show Spoiler
ID: 500230

Every tricky question should trigger a follow up quiz. Build that habit with GMAT Club Forum Quiz →.
Show more
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7393 posts
AbhishekP220108
583 posts
bhanu29
368 posts