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

Eladia

12 days 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

13 days 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

Amina

1 days ago

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

upvoted 0 times

...

Shelba

19 days 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

Raelene

3 days ago

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

upvoted 0 times

...

Sharan

30 days 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

Jesus

15 days ago

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

upvoted 0 times

...

Lon

1 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