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

Redeem

LSAT Taxes and New Buildings

Expert replies
by mundasingh123 » Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:26 am
19. No one in the French department to which Professor
Alban belongs is allowed to teach more than one
introductory level class in any one term. Moreover, the
only language classes being taught next term are
advanced ones. So it is untrue that both of the French
classes Professor Alban will be teaching next term will
be introductory level classes.
The pattern of reasoning displayed in the argument
above ismost closely paralleled by that inwhich one of
the following arguments?
(A) The Morrison Building will be fully occupied by
May and since if a building is occupied by May
the new tax rates apply to it, the Morrison
Building will be taxed according to the new
rates.
(B) The revised tax code does not apply at all to
buildings built before 1900, and only the first
section of the revised code applies to buildings
built between 1900 and 1920, so the revised
code does not apply to the Norton Building,
since it was built in 1873.
(C) All property on Overton Road will be
reassessed for tax purposes by the end of the
year and the Elnor Company headquarters is
on Overton Road, so Elnor's property taxes
will be higher next year.
(D) New buildings that include public space are
exempt from city taxes for two years and all new
buildings in the city's Alton district are exempt
for five years, so the building with the large
public space that was recently completed in
Alton will not be subject to city taxes next year.
(E) Since according to recent statute, a building that
is exempt from property taxes is charged for
city water at a special rate, and hospitals are
exempt from property taxes, Founder's
Hospital will be charged for city water at the
special rate.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by prachich1987 » Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:44 am
IMO : D
Join the discussion

by mundasingh123 » Fri Jan 21, 2011 5:47 am
Hi Pour in with Ur Logic ppl
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Join the discussion

by tendee » Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:18 am
I think the answer is C because it has similar flaw in reasoning that is present in the main para.
Join the discussion

by maihuna » Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:34 am
Rules :
A: No one can teach more than one intro course
B: Only language classes taught are advance one

C: Untrue that Prof A will be taking two intro courses

Prof A can not take both courses i.e. intro because none of the courses are intro and no one is supposed to teach mnore than one.

The ideal match will be two arguments leading to a negative conclusion.

D fits the bill, the two arguments are public spaces and new construction for tax exemption, so tax willn't be charged for newly constructed buildings with (large) public space.
Large looks like alarming, but it didn't disqualify as large public space is also public space.
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Join the discussion

by RACHVIK » Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:20 am
whats the OA?? Why don't you post OA as well??
Rachvik
Join the discussion

by RACHVIK » Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:29 am
The argument states that any one of two conditions could lead to same conclusion and then final conclusion is stated.

IMO D parallels the reasoning.

Thanx
Rachvik
Join the discussion