Question

Some provisions of the Federal tax law, particularly those dealing with individuals, can be explained by social considerations. Which of the following is not an example of this?

1) A tax deduction is allowed for gambling losses at Native American-owned casinos.
2) A deduction is allowed for contributions to qualified charities.
3) A tax credit is allowed for amounts spent to furnish care for dependents to enable the taxpayer to work.
4) Tax law is used to encourage companies to provide employees with health benefits.
5) Various tax credits, deductions, and exclusions are designed to encourage taxpayers to obtain additional education.

Answer 1

The provision of Federal tax law not explained by social considerations is the tax deduction for gambling losses at Native American-owned casinos, as it doesn't reflect a social policy.

Step-by-step explanation:

The student asked which provision of the Federal tax law, regarding individuals, cannot be explained by social considerations. Out of the options given:

• A tax deduction for gambling losses at Native American-owned casinos.
• A deduction for contributions to qualified charities.
• A tax credit for amounts spent to furnish care for dependents to enable the taxpayer to work.
• Tax law used to encourage companies to provide employees with health benefits.
• Various tax credits, deductions, and exclusions are designed to encourage taxpayers to obtain additional education.

The option that is not an example of social considerations within tax law is the first one: a tax deduction for gambling losses at Native American-owned casinos. This provision does not necessarily reflect a wider social policy, unlike the other options which are aimed at promoting charitable giving, supporting dependents, encouraging health insurance, and furthering education.