Sonya: The government of Copeland is raising the cigarette tax. Copeland's cigarette prices will still be reasonably low, so cigarette consumption will probably not be affected much. Consequently, government revenue from the tax will increase.
Raoul: True, smoking is unlikely to decrease, because Copeland's cigarette prices will still not be high. They will, however, no longer be the lowest in the region, so we might begin to see substantial illegal sales of smuggled cigarettes in Copeland.
Raoul responds to Sonya's argument by doing which of the following?
(A) Questioning the support for Sonya's conclusion by distinguishing carefully between no change and no decrease
(B) Calling Sonya's conclusion into question by pointing to a possible effect of a certain change
(C) Arguing that Sonya's conclusion would be better supported if Sonya could cite a precedent for what she predicts will happen
(D) Showing that a cause that Sonya claims will be producing a certain effect is not the only cause that could produce that effect
(E) Pointing out that a certain initiative is not bold enough to have the effect that Sonya predicts it will have
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Copeland cigarette tax
This topic has expert replies
-
LulaBrazilia
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:50 am
- Followed by:1 members
-
Patrick_GMATFix
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 1052
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 1:30 am
- Thanked: 335 times
- Followed by:98 members
Raoul does not dispute Sonya's premise (prices will still be low, and consumption will not be affected), but he challenges her conclusion (that govt revenue from the tax will increase) by introducing a new premise (new prices will be higher than others in the region) and suggesting an alternate conclusion (ppl will buy cigarettes illegally and avoid paying the tax). The full solution below is taken from the GMATFix App.
-Patrick
-Patrick
- Check out my site: GMATFix.com
- To prep my students I use this tool >> (screenshots, video)
- Ask me about tutoring.
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
[email protected]
- Elite Legendary Member
- Posts: 10392
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
- Location: Palo Alto, CA
- Thanked: 2867 times
- Followed by:511 members
- GMAT Score:800
Hi LulaBrazilia,
This CR question is an example of a "conversation" prompt. In these situations, it's important to be clear on what the two people agree on and disagree on.
Sonya's logic:
-The government of Copeland is raising the tax on cigarettes
-Even with the tax, the price of cigarettes will still be reasonably low, so consumption probably won't change much
-The government will see INCREASED REVENUE from the tax.
Raoul's logic:
-Cigratte prices will still not be high, so smoking is unlikely to decrease.
-Cigarette prices will NOT be the lowest in the region.
-There might be substantial ILLEGAL SALES of smuggled cigarettes in Copeland.
Agree:
-Tax isn't enough to affect consumption
-Cigarette price will still be relatively low
Disagree:
-Government will see revenue increase from tax.
-Illegal sales of cigarettes could be substantial.
Sonya's entire argument works IF cigarettes are purchased LEGALLY (then they'll be taxed and the government will have revenue). Raoul points out that her argument won't necessarily work because raising the tax could lead to an increase in illegal/smuggled cigarettes that WON'T BE TAXED (so the government WON'T have that revenue). We need an answer that matches this logic.
Final Answer: B
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
This CR question is an example of a "conversation" prompt. In these situations, it's important to be clear on what the two people agree on and disagree on.
Sonya's logic:
-The government of Copeland is raising the tax on cigarettes
-Even with the tax, the price of cigarettes will still be reasonably low, so consumption probably won't change much
-The government will see INCREASED REVENUE from the tax.
Raoul's logic:
-Cigratte prices will still not be high, so smoking is unlikely to decrease.
-Cigarette prices will NOT be the lowest in the region.
-There might be substantial ILLEGAL SALES of smuggled cigarettes in Copeland.
Agree:
-Tax isn't enough to affect consumption
-Cigarette price will still be relatively low
Disagree:
-Government will see revenue increase from tax.
-Illegal sales of cigarettes could be substantial.
Sonya's entire argument works IF cigarettes are purchased LEGALLY (then they'll be taxed and the government will have revenue). Raoul points out that her argument won't necessarily work because raising the tax could lead to an increase in illegal/smuggled cigarettes that WON'T BE TAXED (so the government WON'T have that revenue). We need an answer that matches this logic.
Final Answer: B
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
