A tax preparation company automatically adds the following disclaimer to every e-mail message sent to its clients: "Any tax advice in this e-mail should not be construed as advocating any violation of the provisions of the tax code. " The only purpose this disclaimer could serve is to provide legal protection for the company. But if the e-mail elsewhere suggests that the client do something illegal, then the disclaimer offers no legal protection. So the disclaimer serves no purpose. The argument's conclusion can be properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed? ['If the e-mail does not elsewhere suggest that the client do anything illegal, then the company does not need legal protection.', "Some of the tax preparation company's clients would try to illegally evade penalties if they knew how to do so.", "At least some of the recipients of the company's e-mails will follow the advice contained in the body of at least some of the e-mails they receive.", 'A disclaimer that is included in every e-mail message sent by a company will tend to be ignored by recipients who have already received many e-mails from that company.']