Logical Reasoning

PT23 · S3 · Q14 If the proposed tax reduction package

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

If the proposed tax reduction package is adopted this year, the library will be forced to discontinue its daily story hours for children.

Conclusion

Proposed tax package will not be adopted this year.

Evidence

Proposed tax package would force library to discontinue its daily story hours, which will greatly inconvenience parents.

Evaluate

The new term in the Conclusion (that therefore must be in the correct answer) is "will not be adopted this year". Any answer that isn't helping us to prove that something "will not be adopted this year" is useless to us.

To bridge the gap from Evidence to Conclusion, we just want to build an idea that goes from where the Evidence leaves us to where the Conclusion wants to take us.

Proposed discontinue parents tax package → daily story → greatly hours inconvenienced

Goal

So we would anticipate this final link parents greatly → not adopted this year inconvenienced

14.

Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the argument’s conclusion to be properly drawn?

  1. Any tax reduction package that

    Illegal Opposite

    A useful answer could have said tax package will force library ? will not be adopted to discontinue this year daily story hours This answer flips the truth value on both the trigger and the outcome.

    3% picked this

  2. Every tax reduction package that

    Unrelated to Goal (new term missing)

    This doesn't have any wording about whether or not something will be adopted this year. Since our entire job is to prove something "won't be adopted", and since the argument didn't provide any rule for what will / won't be adopted, the correct answer must.

    9% picked this

  3. No tax reduction package that

    Unrelated to Goal (new term missing)

    This doesn't have any wording about whether or not something will be adopted this year. Since our entire job is to prove something "won't be adopted", and since the argument didn't provide any rule for what will / won't be adopted, the correct answer must.

    2% picked this

  4. Correct

    No tax reduction package that

    Why this is right

    This says greatly inconvenience ? won't be adopted parents this year We know this tax reduction package would force daily story hours at the library to stop. We know that that would greatly inconvenience parents. And if we add on this rule that anything that would inconvenience parents won't be adopted, then we can derive the idea that the new tax reduction package won't be adopted this year.

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

    83% picked this

  5. Any tax reduction package that

    Illegal Opposite

    We were looking for: does greatly inconvenience ? not adopted And this is saying doesn't greatly inconvenience ? adopted The trigger and the outcome are both flipped from how we want them.

    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