If the city continues to grant tax abatements to developers of upper-i

Question

If the city continues to grant tax abatements to developers of upper-income housing, more funds will be made available for the building of low- and middle-income housing projects by the city. The experience of other municipalities has shown that when upper-income housing is created, the addition to the city tax rolls of the residents of such housing leads to a substantial increase in income tax receipts for the city. The newly generated revenues can then be put towards the construction of new low- and middle-income housing projects.

Which one of the following statements, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

A) The residents who occupy the newly constructed upper-income housing developments are already city tax payers.

B)There is too little upper-income housing in the city to meet the needs of the city’s current upper-income citizens

C)The residents of the city’s low- and middle-income housing projects contribute relatively little to the city’s tax revenue.

D)The idea of constructing new low- and middle-income housing is not consistent with the city’s stated objective of “gentrifying” its poorer neighborhoods.

E)Upper-income citizens of the city may demand a change in the city’s tax codes if they realize how dependent the city is on them for its ability to build new housing projects.

globaldesi · Answer

A breaks the initial assumption that more tax will be created. Since these are already the tax payers, no additional tax would be generated. Hence A weaken the conclusion

dep · Answer

The experience of other municipalities has shown that when upper-income housing is created, the addition to the city tax rolls of the residents of such housing leads to a substantial increase in income tax receipts for the city

The assumption here is that upper income will increase the taxpayers. Hence any statement which weakens this ie A will weaken the argument.

IMO A

Kinshook · Answer

If the city continues to grant tax abatements to developers of upper-income housing, more funds will be made available for the building of low- and middle-income housing projects by the city. The experience of other municipalities has shown that when upper-income housing is created, the addition to the city tax rolls of the residents of such housing leads to a substantial increase in income tax receipts for the city. The newly generated revenues can then be put towards the construction of new low- and middle-income housing projects.

Which one of the following statements, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

A) The residents who occupy the newly constructed upper-income housing developments are already city tax payers. 
Weakens the argument. Since the residents who occupy the newly constructed upper-income housing developments are already city tax payers, it may not lead to increase in tax receipts for the city.

B)There is too little upper-income housing in the city to meet the needs of the city’s current upper-income citizens

C)The residents of the city’s low- and middle-income housing projects contribute relatively little to the city’s tax revenue.

D)The idea of constructing new low- and middle-income housing is not consistent with the city’s stated objective of “gentrifying” its poorer neighborhoods.

E)Upper-income citizens of the city may demand a change in the city’s tax codes if they realize how dependent the city is on them for its ability to build new housing projects.

ravigupta2912 · Answer

Even if the upper income residents lobby for a tax code change and the tax rates are reduced, STILL, the addition of "new" upper income residents to the rolls may increase the OVERALL tax revenues, making more funds available to the municipality for low & middle income housing.

Therefore, E is not the correct choice.

Therefore, E is not the correct choice.

SatvikVedala · Answer

I go with Choice B for this CR

Option A states - " The residents who occupy the newly constructed upper-income housing developments are already city tax payers " - But it doesn't consider the fact, once occupied, these Tax payers has to pay additional tax for the newly occupied house

Advait01 · Answer

(A) Weakens the argument. Since the residents who occupy the newly constructed upper-income housing developments are already city tax payers, it may not lead to increase in tax receipts for the city.

If the city continues to grant tax abatements to developers of upper-i

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

If the city continues to grant tax abatements to developers of upper-i

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards