Critical Reasoning

Federal law prohibits businesses from reimbursing any employees for the cost of owning and operating a private aircraft that is used for business purposes. Thus, many American companies themselves purchase private aircraft. The vast majority of the business aviation fleet is owned by small and mid-size businesses, and flights are strictly for business purposes, with mostly mid-level employees on board. These companies and their boards of directors are in full compliance with the law and with what is best for their businesses.

Which of the following can be most properly inferred from the statements above?

A- The Federal law in question costs businesses money.
B- Most executives would rather fly on company owned planes than on commercial airlines.
C- Large businesses usually have their executives fly first or business class on commercial flights.
D- Upper level executives are less often in compliance with the law.
E- By not receiving any reimbursement for these flights, the mid-level executives on board are complying with the law.

I don't understand the point of this question. Can someone help me understand how to tackle it?
Many thx
PS: The solution of the Problem is e.

P1: Federal Law prohibits REIMBURSEMENT to employees for owning / operating PRIVATE AIRCRAFT
P2: Companies (mostly small and mid-size business) purchased private aircraft with most mid-level execs on board
Concl: Cos and their senior execs conforming to the law by maintaining FIRM PRIVATE JETS and by not reimbursing individuals for the cost of these private aircrafts

what can be inferred?
A. Federal Law costs money. maybe- maybe not. the only question discussed is that companies should maintain aircraft rather than reimburse individuals who own it. Not necessarily an increase in cost.

B. Most execs would rather fly on company owned planes than comm airplanes. No such preference mentioned. OUT of SCOPE

C.Large businesses usually have their execs .... No mention about large businesses. passage only talks about small and mid size businesses. OUT of SCOPE

D. Upper level execs are less often in compliance with the law. this actually WEAKENS the argument because the argument shows that they are in fact in compliance with the law.

E. By not receiving reimbursement, mid level execs in compliance with the law. REIMBURSING is against the law and given that most of the execs who travel on comapny managed jets is mid level execs. so assumend that mid level execs were more likely to own private jets. Now that they fly on corporate jet, both the firm and execs are complying with the law (firm by NOT REIMBURSING and execs by NOT RECEIVING any REIMBURSEMENT).

HEnce E is the answer here.