GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 22 Jun 2018, 17:49

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable

  post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

10 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 123
When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 27 Mar 2018, 12:25
10
64
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  85% (hard)

Question Stats:

57% (01:34) correct 43% (01:53) wrong based on 2359 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Edit: This discussion has retired. Find the new thread HERE


Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 69
Page: 144
Difficulty:


When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which causes the tax burden on nonevading taxpayers to become heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable income.

The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?


(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their pretax incomes.

(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and thus recovering some tax revenue lost through evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their success rate varies from year to year.

(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.

(D) No one who routinely hides some taxable income can be induced by a lowering of tax rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for evaders are raised at the same time.

(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade taxes.

Originally posted by wunderbar03 on 01 May 2005, 04:27.
Last edited by GMATNinjaTwo on 27 Mar 2018, 12:25, edited 2 times in total.
Formatted
3 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 463
Location: Chicago
When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Sep 2005, 14:26
3
1
Viscious Cycle --> People evade tax so law makers make less revenue so they increase tax so more people evade tax

This cycle would not happen if law makers had given leeway for evaders and fixed the tax such a way that they will generate their income, in which case they dont have to increase their tax every year and more people will not start evading.
_________________

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

7 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Oct 2004
Posts: 96
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Sep 2005, 14:30
7
5
The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?

(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an incentive for taxpayers to try to increase
their pretax incomes.

Taxpayers would want to lower pretax
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and thus recovering some tax revenue lost
through evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their success rate varies from years to
year.

If true, the cycle wouldn't be so "vicious"
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue,
they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.

CORRECT, lawmakers aren't allowing for lost revenue, thus the vicious cycle continues.

(D) No one who routinely hides some taxable income can be induced by a lowering of tax
rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for evaders are raised at the same time.

Fines are not mentioned.
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation that will cause
them to evade taxes.
If taxpayers did not differ they all would evade, or they all wouldn't. There wouldn't be increases in evasion that resulted from increases in rates.
4 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 118
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 May 2008, 06:03
4
2
Cycle : Tax Evasion -> Taxes are raised -> Burden on nonevading tax payers -> more taxpayers evade taxes.
How can we break this cycle. Either by ensuring that there is absolutely no Tax Evasion by tax payers, or some way for lawmakers to not raise taxes at all despite evasion.

lexis wrote:
When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion
forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which causes the tax burden on nonevading taxpayers to become
heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable income.
The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?

(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their pretax
incomes.
>> This does not break the chain in any way.

(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and thus recovering some tax revenue lost through evasion, bring
in more than they cost, but their success rate varies from years to year.
>> This can potentially reduce the tax evasion, but not sufficient for law makers to Not raise taxes or avoid evasion completely.

(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.
>> If they establish rates in such a way that their revenues are met despite evasion, they are likely to not raise taxes which is what we were looking for to break the cycle.

(D) No one who routinely hides some taxable income can be induced by a lowering of tax rates to stop hiding
such income unless fines for evaders are raised at the same time.
>> If fines are raised potentiall evasion can be reduced, but we dont know if it can be eliminated 100%.

(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade
taxes.
>> Even if taxpayers differ, ie. people with higher rates evade more often than people with lower rates. We still cant break the cycle.
4 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 498
Location: Eastern Europe
Schools: Oxford
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jul 2008, 16:00
4
1
More variety :) :
I’d pick C.

Quote:
When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which causes the tax burden on nonevading taxpayers to become heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable income.

The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?


We need to find a statement, a negation of which will break the ‘vicious circle’:

(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion. - This is it: if it is false, i.e. lawmakers allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion, then the statement that ‘Tax evasion forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates’ will also be false, and ‘a vicious cycle’ will not take place.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2012
Posts: 391
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Schools: Haas EWMBA '17
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jan 2013, 02:46
Question: The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?
The question is twisted in interesting way with double negations. Note the use of "could not" along with "Unless"="IF..NOT" or "Except-IF".

You can simplify the question to:
Reworded Question: The vicious cycle described above could result if which of the following were true?

Hence you need to eliminate the choices which "breaks" the vicious cycle and choose the choice that does not [break the cycle].

(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.
-- This is the correct answer choice! This situation will ensure that the vicious cycle is continued.

Hence choice(C) is the answer.
_________________

Thanks,
Prashant Ponde

Tough 700+ Level RCs: Passage1 | Passage2 | Passage3 | Passage4 | Passage5 | Passage6 | Passage7
Reading Comprehension notes: Click here
VOTE GMAT Practice Tests: Vote Here
PowerScore CR Bible - Official Guide 13 Questions Set Mapped: Click here
Looking to finance your tuition: Click here

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Mar 2013
Posts: 12
GMAT Date: 04-20-2013
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Apr 2013, 18:29
1
Blue Book CR69

Weaken
Conclusion: Bad cycle results if people escape tax. How so?
Premise: People escape, forces lawmakers to raise tax rate, everyone (even the good ones) suffers, and cause more people to escape tax.
Thinking: Looking at premise should tell you that there are 2 out of 2 choices only: eliminate evaders or lawmakers should not raise tax rate due to evasion.

Not A: Increase in tax rate is good since it allows increase in pretax. This is still under the condition that tax rate is raised.
Not B: Success rate of method detecting evaders shows unreliable. This will still cause the cycle since there are remaining evaders not caught.
It's C: Lawmakers determine tax rate without accounting for lost revenue due to evasion. Lawmakers will not raise tax rate due to evasion.
Not D: People who escape tax cannot be prevented by lowering tax, can only be prevented if evaders are fined. But, the method is no guarantee that evasion will be prevented.
Not E: People have the same tax rate will cause them to evade. This still causes the cycle since people escape tax.
Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2525
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Mar 2014, 19:25
gmat2013s wrote:
When people evade income taxes by not declaring
taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion
forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which
causes the tax burden on non evading taxpayers to
become heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more
taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable
income.

The vicious cycle described above could not result
unless which of the following were true?

Conclusion - People when evade income tax - --> a vicious cycle occurs --->

Consequences/ Basis -Evading forces lawmakers to raise tax rates Causes tax burden on non evading tax payers ---> which in turn encourages more evading

Jump - evading - lawmakers increased tax rate - more evading

Prethink - Lawmakers failed to analyze the consequence of increased tax rate

Here is my problem - Between C and E I chose E [ The official answer is C]
Where I am mistaking ? -- The question asked something specific and giving me trouble


(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an
incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their
pretax incomes. --------------> OFS
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and
thus recovering some tax revenue lost through
evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their
success rate varies from year to year.--------------> M8 be true but not discussed
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in
order to generate a certain level of revenue,
they do not allow adequately for revenue that will
be lost through evasion.----------> m8 be true but not in the way of author want
(0) No one who routinely hides some taxable
income can be induced by a lowering of tax
rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for
evaders are raised at the same time.-----> OFS
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with
respect to the rate of taxation that will cause
them to evade taxes.------------> Negation - Taxpayers will differ from each other W.R.T the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade taxes ---> VC cycle will not occur - breaking of Con ---> Correct -->

Can you please rectify me?

I am suffering particularly for this type of assumption where question is specific .

Please help :roll:


Hi gmat2013s,

I would rather like to have a chat with you to help you on this. But given our limitations, let's try to use this forum.

First of all, what is the definition of an assumption?

Based on that definition and the given question stem, what do you think is the conclusion here?

I am looking forward to the answers to both the questions above?

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________












| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Nov 2012
Posts: 14
Schools: Duke '15
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Mar 2014, 11:59
egmat wrote:
gmat2013s wrote:
When people evade income taxes by not declaring
taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion
forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which
causes the tax burden on non evading taxpayers to
become heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more
taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable
income.

The vicious cycle described above could not result
unless which of the following were true?

Conclusion - People when evade income tax - --> a vicious cycle occurs --->

Consequences/ Basis -Evading forces lawmakers to raise tax rates Causes tax burden on non evading tax payers ---> which in turn encourages more evading

Jump - evading - lawmakers increased tax rate - more evading

Prethink - Lawmakers failed to analyze the consequence of increased tax rate

Here is my problem - Between C and E I chose E [ The official answer is C]
Where I am mistaking ? -- The question asked something specific and giving me trouble


(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an
incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their
pretax incomes. --------------> OFS
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and
thus recovering some tax revenue lost through
evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their
success rate varies from year to year.--------------> M8 be true but not discussed
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in
order to generate a certain level of revenue,
they do not allow adequately for revenue that will
be lost through evasion.----------> m8 be true but not in the way of author want
(0) No one who routinely hides some taxable
income can be induced by a lowering of tax
rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for
evaders are raised at the same time.-----> OFS
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with
respect to the rate of taxation that will cause
them to evade taxes.------------> Negation - Taxpayers will differ from each other W.R.T the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade taxes ---> VC cycle will not occur - breaking of Con ---> Correct -->

Can you please rectify me?

I am suffering particularly for this type of assumption where question is specific .

Please help :roll:


Hi gmat2013s,

I would rather like to have a chat with you to help you on this. But given our limitations, let's try to use this forum.

First of all, what is the definition of an assumption?

Based on that definition and the given question stem, what do you think is the conclusion here?

I am looking forward to the answers to both the questions above?

Thanks,
Chiranjeev



Hallo Chiranjeev

I will try to connect your questions with this argument to understand if there is really some error in my approach and understanding.

I want to learn maximum from this :)

Definition of assumption - A supporting premise which must be true to reach the conclusion .

Its a bridge between premise and conclusion .

When the bridge will be poorly made [ flawed assumption ] ---> It is unlikely to reach at the conclusion .
When assumption is valid --> Conclusion can be accepted as true or believable

Conclusion - ABC test / why test

Why VC results ?
1. People evade tax by not declaring taxable income
2. lawmakers forced to raise tax rate ---> raising burden to tax payers ---> more evasion --> VC occurs.

Question - VC could not occur unless which of the following statement is valid means if any of the following assumption is not valid then VC could not occur .

or - if any of the assumption is flawed or poorly made[ not true ] then the conclusion breaks [ VC couldn't occur]

Prethink - Lawmakers failed to understand that more tax raise can result more evasion --> loss of more money [ so failure of lawmakers in understanding the effect of tax raise is responsible for VC]

(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an
incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their
pretax incomes. --------------> Talks about the effect of increased tax rates [ not the underlying assumption which forces the lawmakers to raise tax ]
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and
thus recovering some tax revenue lost through
evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their
success rate varies from year to year.--------------> M8 be true but not discussed, also concerned about a subset [ not the entire super set]
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in
order to generate a certain level of revenue,
they do not allow adequately for revenue that will
be lost through evasion.----------> if this is true occurrence of Vicious cycle is also true
(0) No one who routinely hides some taxable
income can be induced by a lowering of tax
rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for
evaders are raised at the same time.-----> OFS
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with
respect to the rate of taxation that will cause
them to evade taxes.------------> No effect on the conclusion - irrelevant

I will be happy if the analysis is ok at all .

Thanks Chiranjeev for your concern .

Will wait to hear from you .
Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2525
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Mar 2014, 08:32
gmat2013s wrote:
egmat wrote:
gmat2013s wrote:
When people evade income taxes by not declaring
taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion
forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which
causes the tax burden on non evading taxpayers to
become heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more
taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable
income.

The vicious cycle described above could not result
unless which of the following were true?

Conclusion - People when evade income tax - --> a vicious cycle occurs --->

Consequences/ Basis -Evading forces lawmakers to raise tax rates Causes tax burden on non evading tax payers ---> which in turn encourages more evading

Jump - evading - lawmakers increased tax rate - more evading

Prethink - Lawmakers failed to analyze the consequence of increased tax rate

Here is my problem - Between C and E I chose E [ The official answer is C]
Where I am mistaking ? -- The question asked something specific and giving me trouble


(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an
incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their
pretax incomes. --------------> OFS
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and
thus recovering some tax revenue lost through
evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their
success rate varies from year to year.--------------> M8 be true but not discussed
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in
order to generate a certain level of revenue,
they do not allow adequately for revenue that will
be lost through evasion.----------> m8 be true but not in the way of author want
(0) No one who routinely hides some taxable
income can be induced by a lowering of tax
rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for
evaders are raised at the same time.-----> OFS
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with
respect to the rate of taxation that will cause
them to evade taxes.------------> Negation - Taxpayers will differ from each other W.R.T the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade taxes ---> VC cycle will not occur - breaking of Con ---> Correct -->

Can you please rectify me?

I am suffering particularly for this type of assumption where question is specific .

Please help :roll:


Hi gmat2013s,

I would rather like to have a chat with you to help you on this. But given our limitations, let's try to use this forum.

First of all, what is the definition of an assumption?

Based on that definition and the given question stem, what do you think is the conclusion here?

I am looking forward to the answers to both the questions above?

Thanks,
Chiranjeev



Hallo Chiranjeev

I will try to connect your questions with this argument to understand if there is really some error in my approach and understanding.

I want to learn maximum from this :)

Definition of assumption - A supporting premise which must be true to reach the conclusion .

Its a bridge between premise and conclusion .

When the bridge will be poorly made [ flawed assumption ] ---> It is unlikely to reach at the conclusion .
When assumption is valid --> Conclusion can be accepted as true or believable

Conclusion - ABC test / why test

Why VC results ?
1. People evade tax by not declaring taxable income
2. lawmakers forced to raise tax rate ---> raising burden to tax payers ---> more evasion --> VC occurs.

Question - VC could not occur unless which of the following statement is valid means if any of the following assumption is not valid then VC could not occur .

or - if any of the assumption is flawed or poorly made[ not true ] then the conclusion breaks [ VC couldn't occur]

Prethink - Lawmakers failed to understand that more tax raise can result more evasion --> loss of more money [ so failure of lawmakers in understanding the effect of tax raise is responsible for VC]

(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an
incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their
pretax incomes. --------------> Talks about the effect of increased tax rates [ not the underlying assumption which forces the lawmakers to raise tax ]
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and
thus recovering some tax revenue lost through
evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their
success rate varies from year to year.--------------> M8 be true but not discussed, also concerned about a subset [ not the entire super set]
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in
order to generate a certain level of revenue,
they do not allow adequately for revenue that will
be lost through evasion.----------> if this is true occurrence of Vicious cycle is also true
(0) No one who routinely hides some taxable
income can be induced by a lowering of tax
rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for
evaders are raised at the same time.-----> OFS
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with
respect to the rate of taxation that will cause
them to evade taxes.------------> No effect on the conclusion - irrelevant

I will be happy if the analysis is ok at all .

Thanks Chiranjeev for your concern .

Will wait to hear from you .


Hi gmat2013s,

Thanks for the detailed analysis. I see a lot of changes from your initial analysis.

First of all, your initial conclusion was: People when evade income tax - --> a vicious cycle occurs --->
Now, your conclusion seems to be (you haven't stated it clearly, so it "seems to be"): Vicious cycle

By the way, you are now correct in conclusion identification. If the assumption is defined as something in the absence of which the conclusion will not hold, then as the question stem says here, we are looking for an option statement without which vicious cycle wont hold. So, the occurrence of vicious cycle is the conclusion.

Now, I also see that you agree with the official answer C. However, since your explanations for accepting option C and rejecting option E are so succinct that I cannot really understand your true logic behind these.

Why do you think without option C, vicious cycle will not result? In other words, why without option C (i.e. if we negate the assumption), the conclusion breaks down?

Also, why do you think option E does not have any impact on the conclusion?

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________












| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Nov 2012
Posts: 14
Schools: Duke '15
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Apr 2014, 01:07
Hallo Chiranjev

Sorry for not specifically mentioning the conclusion part , yes , I have changed the conclusion to " VC rsults "
Question asked - to find the condition unless which VC would not result .
Assumption - If the assumption is defined as something in the absence of which the conclusion will not hold, then
Negation of Option C -During increasing of tax rates if lawmakers allow to incorporate revenue that can be lost through evasion then VC will not occur .

To avoid VC they should incorporate the revenue that can be lost through evasion . If they do not allow then VS would result .

So to occur VC - option C must be true

Option E Negation - Now I understood even if Taxpayers differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation still VC will result as there is no connection of tax evasion followed by increased tax rate and more evasion - to -disagreement / agreement with the payable tax rates .

Thanks for showing the correct approach and importance of negation .

Will wait to have suggestion from you .
Regards
Sreshtha
Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2525
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Apr 2014, 01:04
gmat2013s wrote:
Hallo Chiranjev

Sorry for not specifically mentioning the conclusion part , yes , I have changed the conclusion to " VC rsults "
Question asked - to find the condition unless which VC would not result .
Assumption - If the assumption is defined as something in the absence of which the conclusion will not hold, then
Negation of Option C -During increasing of tax rates if lawmakers allow to incorporate revenue that can be lost through evasion then VC will not occur .

To avoid VC they should incorporate the revenue that can be lost through evasion . If they do not allow then VS would result .

So to occur VC - option C must be true

Option E Negation - Now I understood even if Taxpayers differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation still VC will result as there is no connection of tax evasion followed by increased tax rate and more evasion - to -disagreement / agreement with the payable tax rates .

Thanks for showing the correct approach and importance of negation .

Will wait to have suggestion from you .
Regards
Sreshtha


Wow Sreshtha! Awesome comeback!

You are precisely correct now. Amazing job :)

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________












| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 Nov 2013
Posts: 15
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jun 2014, 07:01
1
Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 69
Page: 144
Difficulty:


When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which causes the tax burden on nonevading taxpayers to become heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable income.

The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?

(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their pretax incomes.
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and thus recovering some tax revenue lost through evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their success rate varies from year to year.
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.
(D) No one who routinely hides some taxable income can be induced by a lowering of tax rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for evaders are raised at the same time.
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade taxes.

Dear Mike,

The OA for this question is C. This went over my head!!! Was unable to pick the answer at all! Please guide!!

Thank you
Regards
Soumya
Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4668
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jul 2014, 12:51
2
Soumyasrinivas wrote:
Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 69
Page: 144
Difficulty:


When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which causes the tax burden on nonevading taxpayers to become heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable income.

The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?

(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their pretax incomes.
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and thus recovering some tax revenue lost through evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their success rate varies from year to year.
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.
(D) No one who routinely hides some taxable income can be induced by a lowering of tax rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for evaders are raised at the same time.
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade taxes.

Dear Mike,

The OA for this question is C. This went over my head!!! Was unable to pick the answer at all! Please guide!!

Thank you
Regards
Soumya

Dear Soumya,
Thank you very much for giving such precise information about the source of this question. I am happy to help. :-)

This, of course, is a very high quality question, as all official questions are. It's also very tricky and subtle. I'll point out: when you get a CR question about a topic that doesn't make sense, one thing I'll suggest is: read up on that topic. Even if you simply go to Wikipedia and read about tax evasion. Find some news analyses of tax evasion. Make it a mini-research project to read in depth about this topic a bit. Then, once you have learned a little more about the topic, go back to the question and see whether it makes sense. The GMAT CR is funny. Technically, you don't need outside information to answer any question, but you definitely need to have a general sense of the business world, of the decisions that real-world people make with money, etc. in order to have insight into the CR arguments. Here's the first in a series of articles that provides some real world background that can be helpful in interpreting CR questions.
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-supply-and-demand/

So for this question, there's a vicious loop.
1) People don't want to pay so much in taxes, so they illegally hide taxable income, and evade taxes.
2) Lawmakers don't get as much as they were expecting from the tax revenue, because of evasion, so they raise taxes.
3) Now, taxes are higher, and people have even more incentive to hide taxable income and evade taxes.

There are two parties, the lawyers and the tax payers, and each one, for totally rational and understandable reasons, responds to the action of the other in way that exacerbates the problem. That's a vicious loop.

Now, the prompt is difficult: "The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?" This is hard because of the double-negative construction ("not" + "unless"). In other words, this means: "In order for the vicious cycle to occur, which of the following MUST be true?"

In other words, for the correct answer, if it is true, the vicious cycle can happen, but if it's not true, the vicious cycle couldn't happen. Negating it makes the vicious cycle impossible. That's very important.

For incorrect answers, the vicious cycle could still occur even if we negate the answer: the answer is not strictly necessary for the cycle to occur.

To test the answers, we will need to negate them. The one which, when negated, makes the vicious cycle impossible, is the correct answer.

Now, let's look at the answers.
(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their pretax incomes.
Negation: increasing taxes does not motivate folks to make more money. Going out and making more money is not necessarily an easy thing to do, and it's a little beyond the scope. When the tax rate increase, the argument suggests people respond with more tax evasion. Maybe some people respond by trying to get higher paying jobs, whether this occurs or not does not appear to affect the vicious cycle. This is incorrect.

(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and thus recovering some tax revenue lost through evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their success rate varies from year to year.
If the methods for detecting tax evaders consistently cost more than the money they recovered, then there would be no reason to conduct them, and they would have no affect on the argument. This is incorrect.

(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.
If lawmakers included tax evasion in their calculations when they set taxes, then they would just set the taxes once, taking tax evasion into account, and when real people evaded their taxes, the lawmakers would still get exactly what they predicted they would, so they would not absolutely no incentive to raise taxes any further. This would drastically break the vicious cycle. If this is not true, there is no vicious cycle, so this must be absolutely necessary for the cycle to occur. This is correct.

(D) No one who routinely hides some taxable income can be induced by a lowering of tax rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for evaders are raised at the same time.
The opposite of none is some. Suppose some folks, maybe 1% of the population, could be induced to stop hiding taxable income if the tax rate went down --- suppose they were motivated to do so, even if penalties didn't change. Well, that alone would not break the vicious cycle, because as long as most people are still evading, the lawmakers will not get the tax revenue they were expected, so they will raise taxes, and one taxes go up, even this 1% would adopt the behavior of hiding taxable income. The vicious cycle only depends on people's behavior when taxes go up, not when they go down. This is incorrect.

(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade taxes.
The argument directly implies that this is not true. If the taxes are at one level, and some people evade taxes, and then the taxes go up, and more people evade, it means that the new evaders were not motivated to evade taxes at the previous tax level, but at the new tax level they are motivated to evade. That means, these new evaders are motivated to evade at a different level from that of the folks who were evading at the previous, lower tax level. If the argument directly implies that a statement is false, then that statement cannot be necessary to the argument. This is incorrect.

The only possible answer is (C).

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Expert Post
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT Assassin/Co-Founder
Affiliations: EMPOWERgmat
Joined: 19 Dec 2014
Posts: 11815
Location: United States (CA)
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V49
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable income, a [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Jan 2015, 00:26
Hi All,

This CR prompt describes a circular/repeating cycle that occurs when people evade paying taxes…

1) People avoid paying income taxes
2) Lawmakers are FORCED to raise income taxes
3) The tax burden becomes worse for people who actually pay tax, so….we end up back at Step 1….

1) More people avoid paying income taxes
Etc.

We're essentially asked to define WHY this cycle happens. When reading the prompt, I focused on the word "forced" - why EXACTLY would lawmakers be FORCED to raise taxes if some people didn't pay??? There must be some "need" for that money; when the lawmakers don't get what they need, then they have to raise taxes to try to get what they need. We're looking for an answer that addresses this issue (and likely points out something faulty in the lawmakers plan that causes the problem to occur).

Answer gives us exactly what we're looking for. The root "cause" of the cycle and the reason why it occurs.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
_________________

760+: Learn What GMAT Assassins Do to Score at the Highest Levels
Contact Rich at: Rich.C@empowergmat.com

Rich Cohen

Co-Founder & GMAT Assassin

Special Offer: Save $75 + GMAT Club Tests Free
  Official GMAT Exam Packs + 70 Pt. Improvement Guarantee
www.empowergmat.com/

***********************Select EMPOWERgmat Courses now include ALL 6 Official GMAC CATs!***********************

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 609
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2016, 02:02
1
1
The answer is C

Explaination :-
It is always advisable to break the argument into premise and conclusion in simple language. Lets do it quickly
Premise 1) Tax evasion by cheaters increases the tax burden on honest taxpayers who pay tax properly.
Premise 2) This increased tax burden encourages honest taxpayers to become cheaters and start to evade income taxes themselves.
Conclusion) Therefore by not paying tax, cheaters convert honest people into cheater. This causes a vicious cycle.

Now the conclusion rest on good taxpayers becoming bad cheaters.
What if:- the lawmakers already know that many cheaters will not pay tax and the lawmakers simply have made the tax structure in such a clever way that the loss in revenue caused by non taxpaying cheaters is already compensated by some other method. In other words the lawmaker already know how much income tax will they will get.
Since the collected income tax is within their estimate, there is no reason for the lawmaker to increase the tax rate . Since there is no change in ta rate ,thus the honest people will not become cheaters and thus there will be no vicious cycle. IN OTHER WORDS :- IF LAWMAKER DO NOT HAVE OTHER METHOD TO COMPENSATE FOT THE LOST REVENUES THEN ONLY THIS VICIOUS CYCLE WILL HAPPEN.


Question ask us :- The vicious cycle described above COULD NOT result UNLESS which of the following WERE TRUE ??
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.

YES.... WHEN LAWMKER DID NOT COMPENSATE FOR LOST REVENUE,THEY WILL BE STUNNED AFTER SEEING COLLECTION FROM INCOME TAX. THEY WOULD BE EXPECTING 25 MILLION IN TAX BUT THEY WILL GET ONLY 5 MILLION. THEY WILL THINK :- OH GOD I CANNOT RUN THIS GOVERNMENT SUCH LESS MONEY. I NEED TO INCREASE THE TAX NEXT YEAR TO GET SOME MORE MONEY FROM INCOME TAX.







When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable income, a vicious cycle results. Tax evasion forces lawmakers to raise income tax rates, which causes the tax burden on nonevading taxpayers to become heavier. This, in turn, encourages even more taxpayers to evade income taxes by hiding taxable income.

The vicious cycle described above could not result unless which of the following were true?

(A) An increase in tax rates tends to function as an incentive for taxpayers to try to increase their pretax incomes.
(B) Some methods for detecting tax evaders, and thus recovering some tax revenue lost through evasion, bring in more than they cost, but their success rate varies from year to year.
(C) When lawmakers establish income tax rates in order to generate a certain level of revenue, they do not allow adequately for revenue that will be lost through evasion.
(D) No one who routinely hides some taxable income can be induced by a lowering of tax rates to stop hiding such income unless fines for evaders are raised at the same time.
(E) Taxpayers do not differ from each other with respect to the rate of taxation that will cause them to evade taxes.
_________________

Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.

Re: When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable   [#permalink] 17 Jun 2016, 02:02
Display posts from previous: Sort by

When people evade income taxes by not declaring taxable

  post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.