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.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
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 Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget 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.

levaska savings rate

Expert replies
by kushal.adhia » Mon Sep 20, 2010 10:40 am
Five years ago, as part of a plan to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, Levaska's government introduced special savings accounts in which up to $3,000 a year can be saved with no tax due on the interest unless money is withdrawn before the account holder reaches the age of sixty-five. Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts, so the government's plan is obviously working.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. A substantial number of Levaskans have withdrawn at least some of the money they had invested in the special accounts.
B. Workers in Levaska who already save money in long-term tax-free accounts that are offered through their workplace cannot take advantage of the special savings accounts introduced by the government.
C. The rate at which interest earned on money deposited in regular savings accounts is taxed depends on the income bracket of the account holder.
D. Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts.
E. Many of the economists who now claim that the government's plan has been successful criticized it when it was introduced.


I'm curious to know why the answer is not D.
OA is C



EXTREMELY EXTREMELY SORRY. THIS IS NOT THE QUESTION I HAD A PROBLEM WITH
I've re-posted the correct one... Sorry again
Last edited by kushal.adhia on Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by goyalsau » Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:30 am
kushal.adhia wrote:Five years ago, as part of a plan to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, Levaska's government introduced special savings accounts in which up to $3,000 a year can be saved with no tax due on the interest unless money is withdrawn before the account holder reaches the age of sixty-five. Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts, so the government's plan is obviously working.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. A substantial number of Levaskans have withdrawn at least some of the money they had invested in the special accounts.
B. Workers in Levaska who already save money in long-term tax-free accounts that are offered through their workplace cannot take advantage of the special savings accounts introduced by the government.
C. The rate at which interest earned on money deposited in regular savings accounts is taxed depends on the income bracket of the account holder.
D. Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts.
E. Many of the economists who now claim that the government's plan has been successful criticized it when it was introduced.


I'm curious to know why the answer is not D.
OA is C

I put in more than 5 minutes in this question and in the end marked D,
And when i saw C as a official answer, MY reaction Was OH MY GOD not again.
:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

option D
Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts. I think MANY is the problem over here

Definition of many is
"Many" is an unspecified % and could just mean 1.

So if only one person is moving the saving then that does not make a big impact than the tax income as stated in option C.


https://www.beatthegmat.com/is-most-many ... t8823.html
Join the discussion

by diebeatsthegmat » Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:39 am
goyalsau wrote:
kushal.adhia wrote:Five years ago, as part of a plan to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, Levaska's government introduced special savings accounts in which up to $3,000 a year can be saved with no tax due on the interest unless money is withdrawn before the account holder reaches the age of sixty-five. Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts, so the government's plan is obviously working.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. A substantial number of Levaskans have withdrawn at least some of the money they had invested in the special accounts.
B. Workers in Levaska who already save money in long-term tax-free accounts that are offered through their workplace cannot take advantage of the special savings accounts introduced by the government.
C. The rate at which interest earned on money deposited in regular savings accounts is taxed depends on the income bracket of the account holder.
D. Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts.
E. Many of the economists who now claim that the government's plan has been successful criticized it when it was introduced.


I'm curious to know why the answer is not D.
OA is C

I put in more than 5 minutes in this question and in the end marked D,
And when i saw C as a official answer, MY reaction Was OH MY GOD not again.
:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

option D
Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts. I think MANY is the problem over here

Definition of many is
"Many" is an unspecified % and could just mean 1.

So if only one person is moving the saving then that does not make a big impact than the tax income as stated in option C.


https://www.beatthegmat.com/is-most-many ... t8823.html
the answer is indeed D, not C, recheck the OA
Join the discussion

by g000fy » Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:18 pm
I picked D. I googled to confirm the OA. Found D on another board.
Join the discussion

by goyalsau » Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:55 am
kushal.adhia wrote:Five years ago, as part of a plan to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, Levaska's government introduced special savings accounts in which up to $3,000 a year can be saved with no tax due on the interest unless money is withdrawn before the account holder reaches the age of sixty-five. Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts, so the government's plan is obviously working.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. A substantial number of Levaskans have withdrawn at least some of the money they had invested in the special accounts.
B. Workers in Levaska who already save money in long-term tax-free accounts that are offered through their workplace cannot take advantage of the special savings accounts introduced by the government.
C. The rate at which interest earned on money deposited in regular savings accounts is taxed depends on the income bracket of the account holder.
D. Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts.
E. Many of the economists who now claim that the government's plan has been successful criticized it when it was introduced.


I'm curious to know why the answer is not D.
OA is C



EXTREMELY EXTREMELY SORRY. THIS IS NOT THE QUESTION I HAD A PROBLEM WITH
I've re-posted the correct one... Sorry again
What's the correct Answer of this question?
C or D.

g000fy said that official answer is D.
So what's the correct Answer?
Join the discussion

by gmatmachoman » Tue Sep 21, 2010 3:23 am
Join the discussion