BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

According to the Department of Social Services, new taxes ne

Expert replies
by BTGmoderatorAT » Sun Nov 05, 2017 4:34 am
According to the Department of Social Services, new taxes need to be generated to maintain the solvency of the state's Medical Aid program, which provides medical coverage for the state's poor and uninsured residents. The governor has proposed that a special tax be imposed on those with incomes greater than $300,000 a year to pay for the shortfalls in the Medical Aid program. While new revenues are indeed needed to maintain the Medical Aid program's solvency, the governor's plan for securing the needed funds should be rejected because it would force certain taxpayers to absorb the cost for something from which they would receive no benefit.

Which of the following, if true, would provide proponents of the governor's plan with the strongest counter to the objection that the plan is unfair?

Even with the proposed tax increase, the average tax rate on those state residents earning more than $300,000 a year would remain lower than the tax rate on those earning this same income in neighboring states.
Any attempt to raise taxes on those with incomes greater than $300,000 a year will cause the affluent to find creative ways to shelter their incomes and lower their taxes and thus will prove self-defeating.
Those earning more than $300,000 a year benefit when the state directs funding to research into curing diseases such as arthritis, cancer, and heart disease, and the funding for this research is drawn from general income tax revenues to which the all taxpayers contribute.
When the poor and uninsured go without adequate medical coverage, they avoid medical treatment until their conditions become severe, forcing hospitals to raise rates for everyone so that they can treat this population.
The only alternative way of funding the Medical Aid program now being considered is through a general state income tax surcharge, which would affect affluent and middle class taxpayers alike.

What's the best approach to verify the correct answer?
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by EconomistGMATTutor » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:20 am
The conclusion: The governor's plan for securing the needed funds should NOT be rejected as unfair.

The evidence: There is no evidence provided, but clearly we are meant to choose an answer that shows that the plan would actually benefit those taxpayers who, according to the author, would receive no benefit. In other words, these people (with incomes greater than $300,000) WOULD receive a benefit.

Choice D shows that everyone, which includes those earning more than $300,000 a year, will be hurt financially if the plan is not approved. This supports the conclusion. The plan is a good one for everyone. It's not unfair.

Choice A brings in OTHER neighboring states. Beware the "other" choice. It's irrelevant to the argument.
Choice B does not say that the plan is fair. It just shows that people with high incomes will resort to finding ways of sheltering their income. Opponents of the plan would still say it's unfair.
Choice C starts out promising. It says that the high earners will benefit. But what will they benefit from? This choice says that they'll benefit from GENERAL income tax revenues, which is unrelated to this argument, which is about a "special tax."
Choice E is another "other" choice. This alternative plan is unrelated to evaluating the one in the argument.

I'm available for further questions.
GMAT Prep From The Economist
We offer 70+ point score improvement money back guarantee.
Our average student improves 98 points.

Image
Join the discussion