CR : The government is considering legislation that would

[direstraits007]

The government is considering legislation that would reduce tax benefits for parents opening college savings funds for their children. If passed, the new laws would result in greatly decreased tax benefits for parents who open such accounts. Therefore, if the new laws pass, many college-bound individuals will have difficulty covering their college costs, and some would not be able to attend.
The argument above assumes which of the following?

A) For most college-bound children, their parents’ savings accounts are the only source of educational funding.
B) The legislation is being considered because many parents were misusing savings funds dedicated to their children’s educational costs.
C) College-bound children cannot open savings funds separately from their parents.
D) Because of decreased tax benefits, some parents will not open college savings funds for their children.
E) Parents facing the new restrictions on college funds will find other investments to dedicate to their children’s educational costs.

got this question from PR tests.

I'm confused between answer C and A. I chose C, because perhaps the author assuming that children can't open their own savings account. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[RonPurewal]

The government is considering legislation that would reduce tax benefits for parents opening college savings funds for their children. If passed, the new laws would result in greatly decreased tax benefits for parents who open such accounts. Therefore, if the new laws pass, many college-bound individuals will have difficulty covering their college costs, and some would not be able to attend.
The argument above assumes which of the following?

A) For most college-bound children, their parents’ savings accounts are the only source of educational funding.
B) The legislation is being considered because many parents were misusing savings funds dedicated to their children’s educational costs.
C) College-bound children cannot open savings funds separately from their parents.
D) Because of decreased tax benefits, some parents will not open college savings funds for their children.
E) Parents facing the new restrictions on college funds will find other investments to dedicate to their children’s educational costs.

got this question from PR tests.

I'm confused between answer C and A. I chose C, because perhaps the author assuming that children can't open their own savings account. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

i'd go with (c). the passage states that the new legislation applies only to parents. therefore, any passage stating a potential impact must assume that it is actually parents who will be opening the accounts. therefore, (c) must be assumed.

(a) has two red flags: "most" and "only".
"most" kills the answer choice right away, since the passage only talks about many, not most, college-bound individuals.
"only" is also problematic, because the passage doesn't require such exclusivity. even if there are other sources of funding, a huge dent in tax benefits because of this one type of account could still be damaging.

[vikas.panghal]

C looks fine to me but what is wrong with the option D.

Shouldn't it be D?. I think the argument assumes that a lower number of parents will open savings accounts, which will lead directly to less available funding for their children’s college costs.

what say?

[RonPurewal]

C looks fine to me but what is wrong with the option D.

Shouldn't it be D?. I think the argument assumes that a lower number of parents will open savings accounts, which will lead directly to less available funding for their children’s college costs.

what say?

nope. you don't need to make an assumption that extreme.

remember that assumptions have to be NECESSARY!
this argument relies only on the fact that the new tax law will have adverse consequences on parents who have these accounts (because they'll pay more taxes). the argument DOES NOT REQUIRE that there be parents who actually choose against opening such accounts because of the tax problem.

this is certainly a possibility, and it's certainly reasonable - but that's not what "find the assumption" problems are all about.
on these problems, you have to pick a NECESSARY statement that HAS TO be true to complete the argument.