Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2601:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
02 Sep 2024, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
76% (01:51) correct
24%
(01:58)
wrong
based on 336
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A state government is considering a policy that would require new apartment complexes to feature solar panels to help offset the amount of energy consumed by individual units. The policy would not affect existing apartment buildings, and the cost of the solar panels would be offset by a tax credit that would apply for as long as the original builder owns the apartment complex. Because this tax credit would offset the cost of the solar panels within five years, it is surprising that the apartment building company Aptly Built is protesting the policy.
Which of the following, if true, would best explain Aptly Built’s opposition to the proposed policy?
A. Installing solar panels and other clean energy producing units does not increase the resale value of the apartment complexes.
B. The new policy does not specify whether solar panels must be approved by the government, which could lead to fraud.
C. Aptly Built must currently comply with similar laws in other states that do not include a tax credit.
D. Aptly Built’s current business model involves building apartments and then selling them to management companies immediately after the complexes are completed.
E. The majority of Aptly Built’s ventures involve building apartments in areas of the state where solar panels would generate less energy.
Which of the following, if true, would best explain Aptly Built’s opposition to the proposed policy?
A. Installing solar panels and other clean energy producing units does not increase the resale value of the apartment complexes.
B. The new policy does not specify whether solar panels must be approved by the government, which could lead to fraud.
C. Aptly Built must currently comply with similar laws in other states that do not include a tax credit.
D. Aptly Built’s current business model involves building apartments and then selling them to management companies immediately after the complexes are completed.
E. The majority of Aptly Built’s ventures involve building apartments in areas of the state where solar panels would generate less energy.
03 Sep 2024, 10:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
Let's understand the key points of the argument:
1. The state government wants to require new apartment complexes to feature solar panels to reduce energy consumption.
2. Existing apartment buildings are not affected.
3. The cost of the solar panels would be offset by a tax credit, which applies as long as the original builder owns the complex.
4. Despite the cost being offset within five years, Aptly Built is protesting the policy.
We need to identify the reason Aptly Built is opposing the policy. The explanation should focus on something that would negate the tax credit's benefit or make the policy undesirable for Aptly Built.
A. Installing solar panels and other clean energy producing units does not increase the resale value of the apartment complexes.
This suggests that Aptly Built might not benefit from solar panels when selling properties. However, the tax credit is about offsetting costs, not resale value. This might explain reluctance but isn't the best explanation for outright opposition.
B. The new policy does not specify whether solar panels must be approved by the government, which could lead to fraud.
This introduces a potential issue with the policy's implementation but doesn't directly explain why Aptly Built would oppose it, especially when the cost is offset.
C. Aptly Built must currently comply with similar laws in other states that do not include a tax credit.
This suggests that Aptly Built is already dealing with similar policies, but it doesn't explain why they would oppose this particular policy with a tax credit. It doesn't seem directly relevant.
D. Aptly Built’s current business model involves building apartments and then selling them to management companies immediately after the complexes are completed.
This is a strong answer. If Aptly Built sells the apartment complexes immediately after they are built, they won't benefit from the tax credit (which applies only as long as the original builder owns the complex). This would make the additional cost of installing solar panels a direct financial burden without any offset, explaining their opposition.
E. The majority of Aptly Built’s ventures involve building apartments in areas of the state where solar panels would generate less energy.
This suggests inefficiency in using solar panels but doesn't directly explain why Aptly Built would oppose the policy, especially if the cost is still offset by a tax credit.
The best answer is D. Aptly Built’s opposition is best explained by the fact that their business model involves selling the apartments right after completion, meaning they would not benefit from the tax credit, leaving them with the upfront costs of the solar panels without any offset.
1. The state government wants to require new apartment complexes to feature solar panels to reduce energy consumption.
2. Existing apartment buildings are not affected.
3. The cost of the solar panels would be offset by a tax credit, which applies as long as the original builder owns the complex.
4. Despite the cost being offset within five years, Aptly Built is protesting the policy.
We need to identify the reason Aptly Built is opposing the policy. The explanation should focus on something that would negate the tax credit's benefit or make the policy undesirable for Aptly Built.
A. Installing solar panels and other clean energy producing units does not increase the resale value of the apartment complexes.
This suggests that Aptly Built might not benefit from solar panels when selling properties. However, the tax credit is about offsetting costs, not resale value. This might explain reluctance but isn't the best explanation for outright opposition.
B. The new policy does not specify whether solar panels must be approved by the government, which could lead to fraud.
This introduces a potential issue with the policy's implementation but doesn't directly explain why Aptly Built would oppose it, especially when the cost is offset.
C. Aptly Built must currently comply with similar laws in other states that do not include a tax credit.
This suggests that Aptly Built is already dealing with similar policies, but it doesn't explain why they would oppose this particular policy with a tax credit. It doesn't seem directly relevant.
D. Aptly Built’s current business model involves building apartments and then selling them to management companies immediately after the complexes are completed.
This is a strong answer. If Aptly Built sells the apartment complexes immediately after they are built, they won't benefit from the tax credit (which applies only as long as the original builder owns the complex). This would make the additional cost of installing solar panels a direct financial burden without any offset, explaining their opposition.
E. The majority of Aptly Built’s ventures involve building apartments in areas of the state where solar panels would generate less energy.
This suggests inefficiency in using solar panels but doesn't directly explain why Aptly Built would oppose the policy, especially if the cost is still offset by a tax credit.
The best answer is D. Aptly Built’s opposition is best explained by the fact that their business model involves selling the apartments right after completion, meaning they would not benefit from the tax credit, leaving them with the upfront costs of the solar panels without any offset.
05 Oct 2024, 02:45
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL SOLUTION:
In an “Explain the Paradox” question, remember that you must find an answer choice that bridges the gap between the two facts (as opposed to a premise and a conclusion). Your first job, then, is to reflect on that gap that seemingly makes the two statements incompatible.
Here, the stimulus states that the government may pass a policy that requires new apartment complexes to be built with solar panels. However, it also states that (as long as the original builder owns the building) that the builder will get a tax credit that will pay for the solar panels within 5 years. Apartment complex builder Aptly Built surprisingly opposes this legislation. For them to do so, there must be some sort of gap between the tax credit policy, which would benefit them, and something that they do in their building process that might mean that they don't actually benefit from the tax credit.
The only answer that would mean that they wouldn't benefit from the tax credit is (D), that the company builds apartments and then immediately sells them. Since the tax credit only applies as long as the original builder still owns the building, selling the building immediately would mean that Aptly Built would get no tax benefits and would not gain back the cost of the solar panels.
Among the other answers, choice (A) can be eliminated since it doesn't mean that Aptly Built won't benefit if they have the apartment building long enough for the tax credit to pay for the solar panels. Choice (B) can also be eliminated, since Aptly Built won't be affected by fraud, only whether they have to install the panels and whether they get their money back through the tax credit. Choice (C) would imply that Aptly Built should be more in favor of the law since in this state they could make some money back through the tax credit. And choice (E) can be eliminated since the amount of energy the solar panels produce doesn't affect whether or not they get their tax credit.
An important lesson here: when a question includes "extra" information, it's important to notice it. For example here the policy could be "the cost will be offset by a tax credit," but the argument takes care to note "that will apply for as long as the original owner owns the building." It could just mention "this tax credit would offset the cost of the panels" but also adds "within five years." If you notice these "extras" - original owner, within five years - you should be able to anticipate the right answer or something very close to it.
