考研英語閱讀理解精讀100篇【經(jīng)濟類】

07年考研英語閱讀理解精讀100篇unit9

Unit 9
Richard Evans, a retired lorry driver, and his family were travelling in Spain last summer

when their camper van broke down. They left it to be brought back by the AA. But customs

officers at Dover claimed it was being used for smuggling. They seized the vehicle and all its

contents, including 9,000 cigarettes and 20 bottles of spirits. The van, worth £20,000

($30,800), is still impounded. It even took Mr. Evans six months to recover his 90-year-old

mother-in-law's wheelchair.

Under European Union regulations, people may import an unlimited quantity of alcohol and

tobacco, so long as it is for their own personal use. Had Mr. Evans been driving his van

himself, he would probably have had no trouble. Cases like this are putting Customs and

Excise's considerable powers under scrutiny. A recent stinging High Court judgment about

another vehicle seizure said, "the mindset of those determining these policies has not

embraced the world of an internal market where excise goods can move freely across internal

frontiers." And, on September 18th, the EU announced that it was giving Britain two months to

prove that customs officers were not breaching consumers' rights to shop freely in Europe.

"Cross-border shopping...is a fundamental right under EU law and should not be regarded as a

form of tax evasion," said Frits Bolkestein, the internal market commissioner.

Customs officers have an impossible job. Excise duty and VAT on a pack of premium brand

cigarettes account for 79% of the recommended retail selling price of £4.51. An identical pack

costs £1.97 in Belgium. One in every five cigarettes smoked in Britain--some 17 billion

altogether--has been smuggled. The Tobacco Manufacturers' Association reckons that 80% of

hand-rolling tobacco is smuggled.

The main weapon Customs and Excise has in tackling abuse is to seize cars in which it suspects

goods are being smuggled. Guidelines suggest "personal use" can mean only up to 800

cigarettes, for example. Anyone bringing in more can be asked to explain. In the past three

years, customs officers have impounded more than 22,000 vehicles. Tellingly, only a fifth of

seizures are contested, and fewer than 1% of appeals are successful. Officials say the value

of cross-channel smuggling has fallen sharply in the past year, from £1.6 billion to £400m.

Some customs officers, though, have clearly been over-zealous. And the recent High Court case

ruled that the legislation under which Customs and Excise operates wrongly reverses the burden

of proof. The defendant must prove that he is not bringing in tobacco and so forth for a

commercial purpose. It also said that customs officers must have "reasonable grounds" for

searches: suspicion and instinct are not enough. The government is appealing.

The minister in charge of Customs and Excise, John Healey, accepts that there is an urgent

need to respond to questions about the "legitimacy" of the Customs regime. But he says the

charge that Customs are abusing their powers is wrong: "Customs," he says, "never stop at

random, they never do blanket searches. They always have some ground for stopping people."

Tell that to Mr Evans.

注（1）：本文選自Economist; 9/21/2002, p52-53, 2p；

注（2）：本文習(xí)題命題模仿對象2004年真題Text 3；

1.       How could Richard Evans have avoided such a trouble?

[A]If the camper van didn’t break down on the way.

[B]If the amount of alcohol and tobacco were not too large.

[C]If he carried cigarettes and spirits for personal use.

[D]If he hadn’t asked others to drive the car.

2.       How does the EU feel about the behavior of Customs and Excise?

[A]Critical.

[B]Optimistic.

[C]Indifferent.

[D]Supportive.

3.       How can Customs and Excise check the smuggling effectively?

[A]By doing blanket searches.

[B]By seizing the suspect cars.

[C]By limiting shopping in Europe.

[D]By stopping at random.

4.       What is the charge against Customs and Excise?

[A]They are abusing their power.

[B]They deprive Europeans of their right to a free shop.

[C]They seize the car for no good reason.

[D]Their power is too excessive.

5.       By “Tell that to Mr Evans.”(Last Line, Paragraph 6), the author means

_____________.

[A]Evans should learn a lesson from his experience

[B]what John Healey has said is good for Evans

[C]he does not believe what John Healey has said

[D]Evans should understand what he has experienced

答案：DABAC

篇章剖析

本文采用提出問題——分析問題的模式，非�？陀^地分析了海關(guān)工作確實是一件非常棘手，但也確實非常必

要的工作，但在工作中有些官員表現(xiàn)得過于“熱情”，有濫用職權(quán)的嫌疑，所以招致了一些公民的指控。第

一段以理查德·埃文斯的經(jīng)歷為例，指出他在海關(guān)遇到的麻煩；第二段指出海關(guān)和貨物稅收部門的強大權(quán)力

受到了密切關(guān)注；第三段指出走私現(xiàn)象非常嚴(yán)重；第四段指出關(guān)稅及國產(chǎn)稅務(wù)部門在對付走私時使用的武器

主要是沒收有走私嫌疑的車輛；第五段指出最高法庭訴訟案的新規(guī)定；第六段指出海關(guān)官員的反應(yīng)。

詞匯注釋

AA=Automodile Association of Great Britain汽車協(xié)會

impound [Im5paJnd]vt.關(guān)在欄中, 拘留, 扣押, 沒收

scrutiny [5skru:tInI; (?@) 5skru:tEnI]n.詳細(xì)審查

seizure [5si:VE(r)]n.抓, 捉, 沒收, 查封, 奪取

breach [bri:tF]vt.打破, 突破

evasion [I5veIV(E)n]n.逃避, 借口

VAT=Value-Added Tax 增值稅, 附加價值稅;

premium [5pri:mIEm] adj 質(zhì)優(yōu)價高的;質(zhì)量或價值極高的：

reverse [rI5v\:s] vt顛倒，倒轉(zhuǎn)；撤消或廢除（法令等）

burden of proof n.提供證據(jù)之責(zé)任

defendant [dI5fend(E)nt]n.被告

legitimacy [lI`dVItImEsI]n.合法(性), 正統(tǒng)(性), 正確(性), 合理(性)

at random  adv.胡亂地, 隨便地

難句突破

A recent stinging High Court judgment about another vehicle seizure said, "the mindset of

those determining these policies has not embraced the world of an internal market where excise

goods can move freely across internal frontiers."

主體句式：a judgment said …

結(jié)構(gòu)分析：本句是一個簡單句，關(guān)鍵是理解其中一些詞匯的含義。“stinging”在此句的含義是“棘手的”

；在引用的話中，“mindset”的意思是“思想傾向”，“determining these policies”之前省去了“who

are”，這就變成了現(xiàn)在分詞做后置定語來修飾“those”；“embrace”的意思是“接受”；“where”引導(dǎo)

定語從句來修飾“internal market”。

句子譯文：高級法院最近審理另一起棘手的機動車扣留案件時說明：“決定這些政策的那些人，在思想意識

里并沒有接受歐盟境內(nèi)市場。在這個市場里，征稅貨物在各成員國之間是可以自由流通的。”

題目分析

1．答案為D，屬推理判斷題。原文對應(yīng)信息是：“Had Mr. Evans been driving his van himself, he

would probably have had no trouble.”本句是虛擬語氣 。表示與過去事實相反，從句用過去完成時，主

句用“would have done”。但有時會把“if”省略，把“had”提前，本句就屬于這種現(xiàn)象。

2．答案為A，屬情感態(tài)度題。句子“A recent stinging High Court judgment about another vehicle

seizure said, "the mindset of those determining these policies has not embraced the world of

an internal market where excise goods can move freely across internal frontiers."”中顯然包含

了批評的含義；接下來的句子也是順承這一含義的：“And, on September 18th, the EU announced that

it was giving Britain two months to prove that customs officers were not breaching consumers'

rights to shop freely in Europe.”，我們可看出歐盟也是不贊成海關(guān)的一些做法的；從歐盟內(nèi)部市場委

員Frits Bolkestein的話：“Cross-border shopping...is a fundamental right under EU law and

should not be regarded as a form of tax evasion”，我們更加看出歐盟對待海關(guān)的一些做法的態(tài)度究

竟如何。

3．答案為B ，屬事實細(xì)節(jié)題。原文對應(yīng)信息是“The main weapon Customs and Excise has in tackling

abuse is to seize cars in which it suspects goods are being smuggled.”。從給出的數(shù)據(jù)“In the

past three years, customs officers have impounded more than 22,000 vehicles. Tellingly, only a

fifth of seizures are contested, and fewer than 1% of appeals are successful.”，我們可看出這

一手段確實非常有效。

4．答案為A，屬事實細(xì)節(jié)題。原文對應(yīng)信息是：“But he says the charge that Customs are abusing

their powers is wrong.”。

5．答案為C，屬推理判斷題。從文章來看，作者非�？陀^地分析了海關(guān)工作確實是一件非常棘手，但也確實

非常必要的工作，但在工作中有些官員表現(xiàn)得過于“熱情”，有濫用職權(quán)的嫌疑，所以招致了一些公民的指

控。雖然關(guān)稅及國產(chǎn)稅務(wù)部部長為之也做了辯解，但是并不使人信服，所以在文章最后，作者說了一句：“

Tell that to Mr Evans.”。

參考譯文

理查德·埃文斯是一位退休的貨車司機。去年夏天，他和家人在西班牙旅行的時候，他們開的露營車出了故

障。他們把車留給汽車協(xié)會，由他們負(fù)責(zé)拖回去。但是多佛港口的海關(guān)官員卻聲稱此車被用來走私。他們沒

收了這輛汽車以及車上的所有物品，其中包括9，000支香煙和20瓶烈性酒。直到現(xiàn)在，這輛價值20，000英

鎊（相當(dāng)于30，800美元）的露營車仍然被扣押著。埃文斯先生甚至還花費了六個月的時間才得以取回他那

年高九旬的岳母的輪椅。

歐盟法規(guī)規(guī)定，只要是個人使用，對帶入境的酒和煙的數(shù)量并不限制。假如埃文斯是自己開車的話，那么他

很可能就不會有任何麻煩。類似這樣的案例使海關(guān)和貨物稅收部門的強大權(quán)力受到了密切關(guān)注。高級法院最

近審理另一起棘手的機動車扣留案件時說明：“決定這些政策的那些人，在思想意識里并沒有接受歐盟境內(nèi)

市場。在這個市場里，征稅貨物在各成員國之間是可以自由流通的。”9月18日，歐盟宣布：給英國兩個月

的時間來證明其海關(guān)官員沒有侵犯消費者可以在歐洲自由購物的權(quán)利。內(nèi)部市場委員Frits Bolkestein說：

“根據(jù)歐盟法律，跨境購物是公民的基本權(quán)利，不應(yīng)該被視為逃稅行為�！�

海關(guān)官員的工作相當(dāng)棘手。一包高級香煙所征收的貨物稅和增值稅是其建議零售價4.51英鎊的79%。而同樣

一包煙在比利時售價1.97英鎊。在英國，人們吸的每五支煙中就有一支——總共約170億——是走私過來的

。煙草制造商協(xié)會估計有80%的手卷煙是走私來的。

關(guān)稅及國產(chǎn)稅務(wù)部門在對付這一弊端時使用的武器主要是沒收有走私嫌疑的車輛。條例規(guī)定的“個人使用”

，打個比方，只限800支香煙。攜帶超出此數(shù)量者，將被要求做出解釋。在過去三年里，海關(guān)扣留的車輛超

過22，000輛。這樣做有明顯的效果，這些扣押案例中只有五分之一的案例是有爭議的，上訴案件的勝訴率

還不足1%。海關(guān)官員宣稱去年跨境走私物品的價值從16億大幅度下跌到4億英鎊。

然而，有些海關(guān)官員明顯表現(xiàn)得過于積極。最近的最高法庭訴訟案規(guī)定，海關(guān)方面執(zhí)行有誤的那項法規(guī)把雙

方提供證據(jù)的責(zé)任進行了交換。被告必須證明自己沒有出于商業(yè)目的而攜帶煙草等物品。還規(guī)定海關(guān)官員必

須有進行收查的“合理依據(jù)”：光靠懷疑和直覺是不夠的。政府部門也在做此呼吁。

關(guān)稅及國產(chǎn)稅務(wù)部部長約翰·希利表示，確實迫切需要對海關(guān)系統(tǒng)合法性問題做出反應(yīng)。但他認(rèn)為，有關(guān)海

關(guān)濫用職權(quán)的指控是錯誤的�！昂ｊP(guān)，”他說，“從來不隨意截停，也從不做地毯式搜查。他們攔住某些人

都是有理由的�！卑堰@話說給埃文斯先生吧。

二：資料下載

更多資料請訪問：考試吧考研欄目