Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions: Statement: The government has decided to hold employers responsible for deducting tax at source (TDS) for all their employees. Assumptions: I. Employers may still not arrange to deduct tax at source for their employees. II. Employees may not allow their employers to deduct tax at source.

Introduction / Context:
Policy announcements often prompt test-takers to infer motives or predictions. Here, the state decides to make employers responsible for TDS. We must identify which assumptions are required by the decision itself, not by conjectures about future compliance or employee reactions.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Decision: Employers will be held responsible for deducting TDS for all employees.
• Assumption I: Despite responsibility, employers may still not deduct tax.
• Assumption II: Employees may resist employer deductions.

Concept / Approach:
For a decision to be taken, the minimal assumptions are about administrative clarity and accountability, not about non-compliance being inevitable or employee resistance. The statement does not require predictions of failure by either party; it merely assigns responsibility.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Negate I and II: Even if employers do comply and employees do not resist, assigning responsibility is still a sensible policy. The decision’s logic survives without these suppositions.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only I / Only II / Either / Both: Each imputes unnecessary forecasts about behavior that the decision does not entail.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing reasons a policy might be needed (past non-compliance) with assumptions that must be true for the policy to be adopted or announced.

Final Answer:
Neither I nor II is implicit