Logical Reasoning

PT144 · S2 · Q22 A tax preparation company automatically

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

  • 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

A tax preparation company automatically adds the following disclaimer to every e-mail message sent to its clients: "Any tax advice in this e-mail should not be construed as advocating any violation of the provisions of the tax code."

Conclusion (So)

The disclaimer serves no purpose.

Evidence

The only purpose this disclaimer could serve is to provide legal protection for the company.

If anything in the e-mail suggests that the client do something illegal, then the disclaimer offers no legal protection.

Evaluate

We're trying to prove "serves no purpose" and we are given a rule that allows us to prove "serves no purpose". We just have to establish that the disclaimer provides no legal protection, and then we have proven our conclusion.

"Only" and "Only if" are necessary (right side) indicators, whereas "The only" is a sufficient (left side) indicators. That 2nd sentence would look like this, if diagrammed:

serves purpose → provides legal protection provides legal protection → serves purpose

The 3rd sentence gives us another conditional, signified by "if", which is a sufficient (left side) indicator:

email suggests → provides legal protection something illegal

Goal

The conclusion gives us this logic path:

Disclaimer ----------------------------> serves no purpose

The evidence provides this much of the path:

suggests doesn't serves something → provide leg → no illegal protection purpose

So we'd be anticipating the missing link:

suggests Disclaimer → something illegal

Let's look for an answer that says that the disclaimer suggests something illegal, but we'll take any answer that allows us to prove that the disclaimer serves no purpose.

22.

The argument's conclusion can be properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

  1. Correct

    If the e-mail does not

    Why this is right

    This is one of the most fiendishly designed correct answers to Sufficient Assumption we've ever seen. Let's contrapose this rule, because we were looking for the idea that "the e-mail suggests something illegal", and we would need to contrapose the rule to get the positive version of this idea. If the company needs → then email suggests legal protection doing something illegal Every conditional trigger is either true or false. The company either needs legal protection or doesn't need legal protection. If they do need legal protection, then the email suggests something illegal. If the email suggests something illegal, then the disclaimer offers no legal protection. And since the only purpose this disclaimer could serve is to provide legal protection, this disclaimer would serve no purpose. If the company doesn't need legal protection, then since the only purpose this disclaimer could serve is to provide legal protection, then this disclaimer would serve no purpose. So whether they do or don't need legal protection, In Either Case, we arrive at the same conclusion: the disclaimer serves no purpose.

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

    63% picked this

  2. If e-mail messages sent by

    Unclear Impact

    This also has our desired language about the email suggesting something illegal, but this rule doesn't have the power to prove our conclusion. We don't know if the email suggests anything illegal, so there's no way to trigger this rule. We could do the same procedure we did for (A), where we trace out what would happen if the trigger were true vs. if it weren't true, but in this case the situation where the trigger isn't true would not prove the conclusion. If the email does suggest something illegal, then it provides no legal protection, and serves no purpose. If the email doesn't suggest something illegal, then it may provide legal protection, and may serve a purpose.

    20% picked this

  3. A disclaimer that is included

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: ignored Unrelated to Goal This doesn't help us to establish either of the trigger ideas we need to establish in order to prove the conclusion. Our answer needs to either convince us that 1. the email suggests something illegal or convince us that 2. the email doesn't provide legal protection

    3% picked this

  4. At least some of the

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: follow advice Unrelated to Goal Weak: at least some This doesn't help us to establish either of the trigger ideas we need to establish in order to prove the conclusion. Our answer needs to either convince us that 1. the email suggests something illegal or convince us that 2. the email doesn't provide legal protection If we were just guessing on this problem, we would always avoid guessing a weakly worded answer on Sufficient Assumption (or Strengthen, Weaken, and Paradox).

    11% picked this

  5. Some of the tax preparation

    Trap

    Unrelated to Goal Out of Scope: illegally evade penalties Weak Language: some This doesn't help us to establish either of the trigger ideas we need to establish in order to prove the conclusion. Our answer needs to either convince us that 1. the email suggests something illegal or convince us that 2. the email doesn't provide legal protection If we were just guessing on this problem, we would always avoid guessing a weakly worded answer on Sufficient Assumption (or Strengthen, Weaken, and Paradox).

    3% picked this

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