Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property

Could we say that the below sentence is correct if we replace 'By' with 'In':

Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property tax increases, California has come more and more to rely on personal income taxes for its revenues; income taxes have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent in 2002

Hello, abhishekmayank. If you intend to say that the year is 2002, rather than that that year marks the endpoint of a forty-year period, and to imply that further change could occur within the year, then yes, you could use the present perfect as you have indicated above. You could almost picture the sentence with so far slipped in somewhere as a parenthetical, perhaps after 48 percent.

- Andrew
_________________

There are more than 25000 idioms in English. For us non-native speakers, it is a nightmare to try to rely on idioms. So I recommend you always try to find non-idiom related issues.

Here the first split is between the use of simple past tense and present perfect tense. Many fall for the present perfect trap because they have rightly learned that present perfect tense is used when describing an event that began in the past and that either continues into the present or continues to affect the present.

In this question, while it is true that California still relies on income taxes and hence its effect can still be felt (in fact, for this reason, it uses present perfect tense in the first sentence), we cannot say that the effect of the increase between 1962 and 2002 (i.e. from 18% to 48%) can be felt in the present. If the sentence replaced 'by 2002' by 'this year', then we would use present perfect. It seems like the test makers deliberately included the first sentence (i.e. before the semicolon) to make test takers feel as if the effect of the tax increase (between 1962 to 2002) can still be felt.

Since we need to use simple past tense to describe an event that started in the past and neither continues to the present nor continues to affect the present, we are left with D and E. Let's analyze D. I am not sure whether we must need "to Y" when we have "from X". I try not to rely on idioms. There is an 'and', so let's look for parallelism issue.
Income taxes increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent. This can be split as
(I) Income taxes increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962.
(II) Income taxes by 2002 were 48 percent.
In a parallel structure, each parallel element must make sense independently. Here, in (II), it is not clear what the 48 % is of. While it is common to have ellipsis (omission of words that are understood without being stated) in comparison, it is necessary that each elements of a parallel structure makes sense without other elements. While you might notice GMAT might have broken this rule in some questions, option E do not have such less preferable issues.

There also seem to be a confusion regarding the use of simple past vs past perfect because there is a time marker 'by 2002'. Past perfect tense is used to indicate an event that occurred before a specific date or time in the past. In this question, the increase happened not just 'by 2002' but we know specifically when it started and ended (i.e. from 1962 to 2002), therefore for such specific period of time in the past, we use simple past tense. Please note that you should not automatically think that we must use past perfect tense just because there is a time marker. Consider this example:
By 2010, most people were using emails to communicate.
In this example, 'using emails' did not end before the time marker 'By 2010', so we don't need a perfect tense.

Hi Sir MentorTutoring,

A clarification please:
[/quote]
As per this change to "in", the sentence still should use Simple past, right? because it is something happened in past .
I think i didn't get meaning of the line : and to imply that further change could occur within the year, then yes, you could use the present perfect as you have indicated above.
Could you please clarify with an example when it is suitable to use present perfect tense?

Honestly, with the changes made, it would depend on the meaning the author intended to convey. If the year were 2002, then using the present perfect would be fine. An example, borrowing from the above dialogue:

Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property tax increases, California has come more and more to rely on personal income taxes for its revenues; income taxes have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent (so far) in 2002.

In this sentence, it is understood that there is room for further change within the year 2002, so the present perfect tense would be suitable to use.

- Andrew
_________________

Hey,
The prompt goes - If the action is completed but its effect are still lingering, we use present perfect.

Now, I agree, the "action of increase" did get complete in 2002.
But because of that "California has come more and more to rely", the effect is still going on, isn't it?

May be, GMAT retired this question for this confusion only !

Hello, DexterZabula. The incomplete action or effect you are referring to is California relying more and more on personal income taxes for its revenues, not the action or effect of the timeframe 1962 to 2002. Regardless of what happened within that span of years, the years themselves represent the bookends of a definitive period of time. The only way we could use the present perfect with such a construct is if the latter year mentioned were understood to be the present year. Compare:

1) From 1980 to 2000, global wealth increased...

2) From 2000 to 2020, global wealth has increased...

I suspect the question was retired after having seen action many times over and tricking many a test-taker. I am sure there are questions within the current pool that test this very concept or split.

I hope that helps clarify any confusion you had. If not, I would suggest reading over the entire thread and seeing if any responses resonate with you. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew
_________________

EducationAisle , EMPOWERgmatVerbal I'd like to ask how is increased in option D/E a verb instead of a past participle modifier, Clearly I dont see How Income taxes(subject) is the doer of Increasing taxes percentage in past. This makes absolutely no sense to me and I rejected them right off the bat since semi colon implies what comes before and after should be a independent clause and I dont see no verb for Income taxes . Please Help! much appreciated

Hi Deeptanshu02, this is no different from:

In 2020, prices of essential commodities increased.

Hope it is quite clear that above is a valid sentence and increased is a verb.
_________________

egmat
Hi Mam,
I followed your verb-ed and verbs article and has found helpful in solving many questions, but i am struck here.
Income tax increased....
Can income tax perform the action of increasing something? No!
so i thought increased is a Verb-ed modifier and went with option as it is a independent clause.
Can you please help me on this.

Hi KSN27,

Until you receive a more complete response: "income taxes increased" just means "income taxes went up" (that is, they did not increase something else).
_________________

Hi, Could anyone tell what is the verb in the second clause after semicolon. Ideally after semicolon we need a independent clause, But after semi colon I could not find many verb for the subject taxes.
As per me increased is not a verb rather its an adjective modifying taxes.

Hi vishumangal, as manvig has pointed out, increased is a verb here, and not a past participle (adjective).

Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses how to differentiate between "Simple Past Tense Verb" and "Past Participle", its application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
_________________

Isn't "increased" acting as a modifier for income taxes in options D & E ?
I ended up marking A.

Hi penco,

Increased is a verb there (its subject is income taxes).

You could also go through this post and this post.
_________________

GMATNinja could u please explain this question

Hello experts,

Can you please point out why we wouldn't use past perfect in option E?

I had eaten my food by the time my dad came.

Why is it that in my example we need past perfect and in option E we don't? Can you please explain what I'm missing here?


Thank you in advance!

VeritasKarishma EducationAisle

You need past perfect to show a state or event in the past prior to another time/event in the past.
She had never cooked pasta before yesterday.
A time in the past - yesterday
Event prior to that - cooked pasta

In our original sentence, the "increase" (the event) happened over period of time in the past (from '62 to '02). We don't need past perfect for it. There is no prior event/state here. There is only one action (increase) which happened over this period.

Also check:
https://www.gmatclub.com/forum/veritas-prep-resource-links-no-longer-available-399979.html/2015/0 ... questions/
_________________

Hi Ashmit, you ask a very good question.

Generally the presence of by in a sentence is indeed a prominent indicator that past perfect is likely to be the correct usage. This sentence is a case in point.

While the sentence under consideration also uses by, the intent of the sentence is just to state the following:

<something> increased from x% to y% between 1962 and 2002.

Since we are just talking about something that happened between two specific times in the past, simple past is an appropriate usage.

p.s. On a brighter note, no option uses a past perfect. So, this isn't something that you have to take a call on.
_________________