Critical Reasoning

Technically a given category of insurance policy is underpriced if, over time, claims against it plus expenses associated with it exceed total income from premiums. But premium income can be invested and will then yield returns of its own. Therefore, an underpriced policy does not represent a net loss in every case.
The argument above is based on which of the following assumptions?
(A) No insurance policies are deliberately underpriced in order to attract customers to the insurance company offering such policies.
(B) A policy that represents a net loss to the insurance company is not an underpriced policy in every case.
(C) There are policies for which the level of claims per year can be predicted with great accuracy before premiums are set.
(D) The income earned by investing premium income is the most important determinant of an insurance company's profits.
(E) The claims against at least some underpriced policies do not require paying out all of the premium income from those policies as soon as it is earned.



I have read in Manhattan's CR guide that answer choice options having Reverse logic are incorrect.

Here, If I negate choice b i.e. Policy that represents a loss --> is an underpriced policy

Conclusion, Underpriced policy --> doesn't represent loss


isn't this a reverse logic option?