ISTQB Exam ATA Topic 4 Question 86 Discussion

Actual exam question for ISTQB's ATA exam

Question #: 86
Topic #: 4

[All ATA Questions]

Tax system

A tax system needs to be updated due to new legislation. For a person with a salary of less than 20.000 and who is married, the tax needs to be re-calculated. If the person also has more than two and less than five children, an additional 10% reduction is applicable.

Applying equivalence partitioning to the ''Tax System'' specification, which of the following set of equivalence classes is most effective in testing the processing the number of children?

[K3] 2 credits

A2, 4 and 6 children

B2, 4 and 5 children

C1, 3 and 6 children

D3, 4 and 6 children

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: A

by Fredric at Feb 08, 2025, 08:43 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ATA Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Stefan

2 days ago

Hmm, this looks like a tricky one. I'll need to carefully think through the equivalence classes for the number of children to find the most effective set.

upvoted 0 times

...

Eladia

5 months ago

I hope the person with 6 children doesn't have to pay more taxes. That's just cruel, even for a tax system.

upvoted 0 times

...

Charlene

5 months ago

Ah, the joys of tax systems. I bet the developer who wrote this code was just trying to avoid having to deal with the 'more than 5 children' scenario. Option B it is!

upvoted 0 times

Kent

3 months ago

Definitely, testing with 2, 4, and 5 children will help verify the additional 10% reduction calculation.

upvoted 0 times

...

Alishia

4 months ago

I think option B is the most effective choice for testing the number of children in the tax system.

upvoted 0 times

...

Joseph

4 months ago

Yeah, it makes sense to test with 2, 4, and 5 children to ensure the tax calculation is correct.

upvoted 0 times

...

Amina

4 months ago

I agree, option B seems to cover the range of children specified in the requirements.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shelba

5 months ago

Hold up, why are we only testing the number of children? What about the salary and marital status? Shouldn't we be testing those as well? This question is missing some key details.

upvoted 0 times

Ming

4 months ago

User 3: It's important to make sure all aspects are covered in testing.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dwight

4 months ago

User 2: Maybe they are testing those separately in other test cases.

upvoted 0 times

...

Raelene

4 months ago

User 1: I agree, we should be testing the salary and marital status too.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sharan

5 months ago

I'm not sure about this one. Shouldn't we test the edge cases of 2 and 5 children? I'm leaning towards option C, just to be on the safe side.

upvoted 0 times

Carlene

4 months ago

Let's go with option C to cover a wider range of scenarios.

upvoted 0 times

...

Van

4 months ago

I agree, option C includes 1 and 3 children which are good edge cases to test.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jesus

5 months ago

I think we should consider testing the edge cases of 2 and 5 children.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lon

5 months ago

Hmm, I think option B is the way to go. Covering the range of 2, 4, and 5 children seems like the most comprehensive approach to testing the number of children.

upvoted 0 times