ziyuenlau wrote:Various goods brought into America have been taxed over the years, but the art tariff of 1883 forced policy-makers to examine the status of art in society and the idea of art as a commodity. The tariff, which was vehemently opposed by both European and American artists, increased levies on all artworks imported to America, which, for all practical purposes, lumped them into the category of luxury items. Opposition to the tariff rested largely on the idea that a work of art could not be classified as a luxury item and thus should not be subject to tax. Instead, opponents considered art an instrument of culture and an essential element of public education.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the justification for the art tariff?

(A) Art imports were taxed to help pay for the Civil War.
(B) Most art collectors donated their works to museums.
(C) Most artworks imported to America were purchased by private collectors.
(D) The status of art as a material object distinguishes it from music.
(E) Works by contemporary artists were excluded from the tax.

Source : Kaplan
OA=B

The justification for the art tariff: art can be qualified as a luxury item
To undermine this justification, we'd want to show that art is not a luxury item.

This seems to be what B is going for. If most collectors are donating their art to museums, then they don't seem to see art as a luxury item, the way they'd see, say, a private jet as a luxury item. [Note: the question would have been tighter if "luxury item" had been defined as "private indulgence."

Some people may find this critical reasoning question difficult because it does not seem to follow the format of other, easier critical reasoning questions. Many students just scan the text looking for key words such as therefore, thus, clearly, etc., as a guide to the conclusion. This argument, however, doesn't have a clearly stated conclusion.

The first step in isolating the conclusion is to read the question. The question says: Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the justification for the art tariff?

With that in mind, we can paraphrase the conclusion as one of the following:

Weaken: The art tariff was justified.
Strengthen: The art tariff was not justified.

Even though this question is written as a weaken, I'm going to treat it as a strengthen with the second paraphrased conclusion to demonstrate that this approach is not only possible but also superior (on some questions).

The art tariff was not justified.

Why?

Because a work of art cannot not be classified as a luxury item and thus should not be subject to tax. Art is an instrument of culture and an essential element of public education.

Which of the following choices supports this idea? Answer choice (B).

As David already pointed out, luxury items such as yachts are not donated to museums. So if artwork is donated to museums, it cannot be a luxury item.

Admittedly, the question could have been tighter. The answer requires you to know or assume that luxury items don't get donated to museums. The problem would have been better had this information been included in the answer choice.