What the question means to say is the amount the 1 % richest americans used to pay to the federal taxes has reduced but the proportion of this amt in the total amt collected by the federal taxes is now 16.2 as oppsoed to the normal 12.7 when they used to pay higher taxes.it is only a normal expectation that if u are now paying less to a body than ur proportion in the total amt collected by that body will decrease, So explain this discrepancy is what they are asking wit the help of 1/5 stmnts.Hope this makes sense !
Now for the answer
A : doesnt give any support what so ever, becoz IRS has added staff now , they should have been able to collect more revenue if anything.
B : says that richest were earning more than they were in the past so now the scenario is more money -> more taxes but then here is the twist , since there was an inflation therefore the taxable income has to reduce thus justifying for the reduce in the amt paid, butwhen the richest 1% was hit so much by the inflation to reuce from 40 -> 25 then the rest of ppl would have defi been hit harder thus explaining the reason why the rich still continued to contribute the highest towards the whole sum amt.
C : If someone has converted his non taxable assets -> taxable then his taxes should have been higher.
D : If tax loopholes were eliminated then the amt collected should have been higher whereas it is reducing but if the reduction is attributed to the lowering of the taxes then why is it that the percentage in the amt collected has increased ?
E : if there was an increase in the amt of taxes paid then the q is contradicted
Between B & D
i find B to be stronger !