Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Easy

PT147 S3 P4 Q23 Explanation

Flat Tax Systems

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsMethodSociety

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

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.

Passage

Passage

In 1994, Estonia became the first country to introduce a “flat tax” on personal and corporate income. Income is taxed at a single uniform rate of 26 percent: no schedule of rates, no deductions. So far eight countries have followed Estonia’s example. An old idea that for decades elicited the response, “Fine be working as well in practice as it does on the blackboard.

Practical types who said that flat taxes cannot work offer a further instant objection, once they are shown such taxes working, namely, that they are unfair. Enlightened countries, it is argued, have “progressive” tax systems, requiring high-income earners to forfeit a bigger share of their incomes in flat tax seems to rule this out in principle.

Not so. A flat tax on personal incomes combines a threshold (that is, an exempt amount) with a single rate of tax on all income above it. The extent to which such a system is progressive can be varied within wide limits using just these two variables. Under the systems operating in as much tax under new flat-tax regimes as they would have paid under the previous codes.

Passage

A lot of people don’t understand graduated, as opposed to “flat,” taxes. They think that if you make more money you pay a higher rate on your entire earnings, which seems unfair. Actually, graduated progressive taxes treat all taxpayers equally. Every taxpayer pays the same rate on equivalent layers of income. People of income over a specified amount. People, not dollars, are treated equally.

All people are created equal, but not all dollars are created equal. Earnings of the working poor go almost entirely for survival expenses such as food, shelter, and clothing. At that level, every dollar is critical; even a small difference causes tremendous changes in quality of life. Middle-income have much greater flexibility in absorbing small fluctuations in income.

Even some of the flat tax proposals recognize this, and want to exempt a primary layer from the tax system. So, since they recognize that survival dollars are different from discretionary dollars, why go suddenly from one extreme (paying no taxes) to the other (paying the top rate)? Since flat tax proposals it is naturally going to fall on the middle class to make up the difference.

What this question is testing

Method

Your task

Describe how the argument proceeds — the technique it uses to reach its conclusion.

Common trap

Answers that describe a method the argument doesn't actually use.

Winning move

Track the role each statement plays, then match that to the choice describing the same moves.

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

The question
23.

Both passages seek to advance their arguments by means of which one

Answer choices

  1. No Support from Passage B1% picked this

    accusing opponents of shifting their

    The beginning of the 2nd paragraph of Passage A involves something resembling an opponent shifting their ground: These practical types at first say "flat taxes cannot work", and then once they're shown such taxes working, shift their objection to "okay, well either way, they're unfair!" But passage B has nothing like that.

  2. Only Passage A2% picked this

    citing specific historical developments as

    Passage A tells us about Estonia and eight other countries who have recently instituted to flat tax systems to some degree of success. Passage B doesn't have anything like that.

  3. Neither Passage4% picked this

    arguing on the basis of an

    As far as I can see, neither passage presents any analogies.

  4. Only Passage B4% picked this

    employing rhetorical

    The last paragraph of Passage B has a rhetorical question -- "why go from one extreme to the other"? But Passage A has nothing like that.

  5. Correct88% picked this

    correcting alleged

    Why this is right

    Passage A's 2nd paragraph tries to correct the misunderstandings of the "Practical types". These practical types think that "a flat tax seems to rule [progressive] taxes out in principle. Not so." And then the 3rd paragraph tries to correct this misunderstanding. Passage B begins with, "A lot of people don't understand graduated taxes ... they think that ____ . (but) Actually, ____ ."

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

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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