请教GWD6-Q20

cxx257

Five years ago, as part of a plan to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, Levaska’s government introduced special savings accounts in which up to $3,000 a year can be saved with no tax due on the interest unless money is withdrawn before the account holder reaches the age of sixty-five.Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts, so the government’s plan is obviously working.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?



A.A substantial number of Levaskans have withdrawn at least some of the money they had invested in the special accounts.

B.Workers in Levaska who already save money in long-term tax-free accounts that are offered through their workplace cannot take advantage of the special savings accounts introduced by the government.

C.The rate at which interest earned on money deposited in regular savings accounts is taxed depends on the income bracket of the account holder.

D.Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts.

E.Many of the economists who now claim that the government’s plan has been successful criticized it when it was introduced.

答案是D。但我一直不明白为什么。求教

sdcar2010

If you look at the bigger picture of TOTAL saving for the Levaska region,
If D is true, part of the money in the special account is TRANSFERRED savings from the old long-term saving.

For the claimed purpose to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, D weakens the argument since the NET saving could be zero.