The government of Country X recently implemented a series of measures

Question

The government of Country X recently implemented a series of measures aimed at reducing the incidence of smoking-related illnesses. One of these measures was to increase the tax on cigarettes, thereby raising their prices significantly. Health officials predict that the higher prices will deter new smokers, particularly among teenagers, and encourage current smokers to quit or reduce their consumption. However, the tobacco industry argues that such a measure will not have a significant impact on the number of smokers but will instead lead to an increase in the smuggling of cheaper, untaxed cigarettes.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the health officials' prediction that the increase in cigarette taxes will reduce the incidence of smoking-related illnesses?

A. In countries where cigarette taxes have been increased, there has been a corresponding increase in the smuggling of untaxed cigarettes.

B. Surveys indicate that the majority of current smokers in Country X are low-income individuals who are the most sensitive to price increases.

C. Research shows that teenagers are less likely to start smoking if the price of cigarettes is prohibitively high.

D. The tobacco industry has a history of opposing any measures that could potentially reduce the consumption of their products.

E. A neighboring country that raised cigarette taxes saw no significant decrease in smoking-related illnesses within the first year of the tax increase.

parthwagh · Answer

The correct answer is C.  This is because the health officials' prediction focuses on deterring new smokers, particularly among teenagers, and encouraging current smokers to quit or reduce their consumption. Therefore, evidence that supports a reduction in the initiation of smoking among teenagers due to high prices would directly support the health officials' prediction. Answer choice C states that teenagers are less likely to start smoking if the price is high, which is precisely the outcome the health officials are expecting from the tax increase.

Answer choice B might be tempting because it notes that current smokers, who are low-income, are most sensitive to price increases. However, it doesn't directly tie this sensitivity to a reduction in smoking or smoking-related illnesses.

Answer choice A would weaken the health officials' prediction because it suggests that the tax increase could lead to an increase in untaxed cigarette smuggling, which might undermine efforts to reduce smoking.

Answer choice D doesn't provide any specific information about the effectiveness of the tax increase; it only mentions the tobacco industry's general opposition to such measures.

Answer choice E weakens the health officials' prediction by providing an example of a neighboring country where a similar measure did not lead to a significant decrease in smoking-related illnesses, at least not within the first year.

Oppenheimer1945 · Answer

KarishmaB  , what’s the right way to reject B?

Or is it just not as good as option C?

Posted from my mobile device

kkannan2 · Answer

Hi  samagra__  I got this one wrong too, since (B) was tempting. This is a tough question! But let me try explaining why I think C is a better answer after thinking about it more:

The prediction of the health officials is that the tax on cigarettes is going to reduce the incidence of smoking related illnesses by deterring new smokers from smoking or by encouraging existing smokers to quit smoking or reduce their consumption. The tobacco industry argues that there will be no such change once the tax gets implemented because cheaper cigarettes will be smuggled in, thus avoiding the tax.

(B) says that the majority of smokers in Country X are low income individuals and are most sensitive to price increases. If we think about this carefully in scope of the tobacco industry's argument about importing of cheaper cigarettes to avoid the tax, it certainly seems plausible that we could have a scenario where the tobacco consumption of these people is not reduced, but perhaps stays the same or even increases given that smuggling of cheaper cigarettes could be going on, which brings in cigarettes that these people can afford. This means the incidence of smoking-related illnesses may not actually decrease, given that these low income smokers may still be smoking cigarettes that could be as potent or perhaps even more potent than the more expensive cigarettes (we don't have any evidence to say that they're any less potent). Thus, this answer choice seems to strengthen the tobacco industry's position, if anything, which is not the position we're trying to strengthen here. Since the tobacco industry's point of view is not outright dismissed and remains as a possibility, we can rule this out.

(C) most directly connects to the wording of the health officials' prediction in the argument. It says that there is a lesser likelihood of teenagers to start smoking when the price of cigarettes is prohibitively high. This would accomplish one of the goals of the plan, which is to reduce the number of new smokers in Country X as a result of an increase in cigarette prices. Now, the only keywords to be careful about here are "prohibitively high", which we may not be entirely convinced about from the initial read of the passage, but we know that the prices are rising "significantly" and the goal of increasing these prices is to reduce the incidence of smoking-related illnesses via deterring new smokers from smoking, so this works out. It is the best answer choice left, so we can choose it with confidence.

Let me know if this helps and leave a kudos if it helped! Also,  KarishmaB  and  GMATCoachBen  let me know if this is a good analysis or if I'm missing something.

KarishmaB · Answer

I don't know what the source of this question is but it is an example of why I ask my learners to stick to ONLY official questions. Such questions cause more confusion than they are worth. 
I would select (B) but I know that (C) makes sense too. 
I need to strengthen this: "the health officials' prediction that the increase in cigarette taxes will  reduce the incidence of smoking-related illnesses"

B. Surveys indicate that the majority of current smokers in Country X are low-income individuals who are the most sensitive to price increases.

If majority of current smokers are sensitive to price increases, then we are likely to see a reduction in incidence of smoking and hence smoking related illnesses (which occur due to long term smoking) if price increases.

C. Research shows that teenagers are less likely to start smoking if the price of cigarettes is prohibitively high.

Will increased tax make the price "prohibitively high," I don't know? Also, "starting smoking" isn't linked directly to "smoking related illnesses"

Hence if I had pick between the two, I would pick (B).

MS26 · Answer

Hey, just one point i would like to add to your explanation, likely doesn't mean they will not start as per option choice C, so your explanation is not plausible

The government of Country X recently implemented a series of measures

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

The government of Country X recently implemented a series of measures

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