Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT105 S4 Q14 Explanation

Citizen: Our legislators need to

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsNecessary Assumption

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Citizen: Our legislators need to act quickly to counter the effects of the recession, especially the present level of unemployment, which is the highest ever. We urgently need a major tax cut for our upper-income citizens. There would then be a correspondingly large increase this measure is not taken, investment will not grow.

What this question is testing

Necessary Assumption

Your task

Find the assumption the argument requires in order for its conclusion to hold.

Common trap

Answers that would help the argument but aren't strictly required (sufficient, not necessary).

Winning move

Negate each choice — the right one breaks the argument when negated.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
14.

The citizen's argument depends on the

Answer choices

  1. Out of Scope0% picked this

    the recession in the citizen's country is the worst one in

    Out of Scope: Greatest recession / Historical tendency Option (A) is irrelevant to the logic of how a tax cut would lead to job creation. The severity of the recession doesn’t necessarily affect how the tax cut would be used for investment.

  2. Too Strong: More likely / More money26% picked this

    the greater the tax cut given to a group of people, the more likely it is that members of that

    Option (B) suggests a generalized likelihood that bigger tax cuts lead to more investment but doesn’t specify the necessity of investment increasing solely due to the tax cut as argued.

  3. Trap3% picked this

    upper-income citizens have invested more money in total than have

    Option (C) compares investments by income groups but doesn’t address the necessity for the affluent to use their tax breaks in a manner that promotes job creation.

  4. Correct66% picked this

    upper-income citizens could use the money gained from the tax cut in ways

    Why this is right

    The correct answer should indicate that the money gained from a tax cut by upper-income citizens will indeed increase investment, which aligns with choice (D). Choice (D) states that upper-income citizens could use the money gained from the tax cut in ways that increase investment. This directly connects the proposed tax cut to the likely behavior that would fulfill the citizen's ultimate goal: job creation through increased investment.

    Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Trap4% picked this

    in the past tax cuts for certain groups of people have tended to

    Option (E) looks neither necessary nor sufficient. While historical trends of tax cuts leading to job creation could support the argument's plausibility, the argument is specifically dependent on current outcomes, not historical precedent.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free