Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT116 S3 Q15 Explanation

In 1975, a province reduced

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

TopicsParadox

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

In 1975, a province reduced its personal income tax rate by 2 percent for most taxpayers. In 1976, the personal income tax rate for those taxpayers was again reduced by 2 percent. Despite the decreases in the personal income tax rate, the total amount of from 1974 to 1975 and rose substantially in 1976.

What this question is testing

Paradox

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question
15.

Each of the following, if true, could help to resolve the apparent discrepancy

Answer choices

  1. Helps Explain9% picked this

    The years 1975 and 1976 were ones in which the province’s economy

    During the two years when taxes were lower, there was more money in the economy in general (more prosperous). 28% of a richer nation's economy could be more than 32% of a less prosperous nation's economy. (I'm just making up 28% as the new tax rate after a 32% rate was reduced by 2% for two years in a row)

  2. Helps Explain7% picked this

    The definition of “personal income” used by the province was widened during 1975 to include income

    If the definition is widened, then there is more money being taxed as personal income ... 28% of a bigger pool of money is more than 32% of a smaller pool.

  3. Helps Explain7% picked this

    The personal income tax rate for the wealthiest individuals in the province rose during

    The rich people are being taxed more, so even though most people went from 32% to 28%, rich people went from 40% to 50%. A smaller tax slice of poorer people combined with a juicier tax slice of richer people could end up netting more tax revenue.

  4. Correct70% picked this

    The province’s total revenue from all taxes increased during both 1975

    Why this is right

    Other types of tax revenue is out of scope. We're only concerned with explaining how lower rates on personal income tax could result in higher total revenue from personal income tax. This just restates the paradoxical fact (while adding that non-personal income tax is also rising), but we still don't have a cause for why it's rising.

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

  5. Helps Explain7% picked this

    A large number of people from other provinces moved to the province during

    More people move in, more people to tax. 28% of a bigger population could bring more tax money than 32% of a smaller population.

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