Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 02:22 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 02:22
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3 
User avatar
psurabhi
User avatar
Joined: 04 May 2016
Last visit: 15 Dec 2021
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
2
Posts: 8
Kudos: 2
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 03 Aug 2021, 03:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello,

I found a similar question to this below:
The emerging field of architectural climatology centers on the potential of as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping to alter, redirect, or dissipate weather systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms.

A)systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms
B)systems; for example, artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that could prevent hurricanes from forming
C)systems, such as hurricanes, which artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms prevent forming
D)systems, such as artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that can prevent hurricanes from forming
E)systems; for example, hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms

In the above question, option A is eliminated stating reason that what follows semi-colon is not a complete sentence. Here "prevented" is acting as a modifier.

Hence, I do not understand why in this sentence, "increased" is taken as a verb ?

Thanks
Surabhi
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 03 Aug 2021, 05:32
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
psurabhi
Hello,

I found a similar question to this below:
The emerging field of architectural climatology centers on the potential of as-yet-undeveloped architecture and landscaping to alter, redirect, or dissipate weather systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms.

A)systems; for instance, hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms
B)systems; for example, artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that could prevent hurricanes from forming
C)systems, such as hurricanes, which artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms prevent forming
D)systems, such as artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms that can prevent hurricanes from forming
E)systems; for example, hurricanes could be prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms

In the above question, option A is eliminated stating reason that what follows semi-colon is not a complete sentence. Here "prevented" is acting as a modifier.

Hence, I do not understand why in this sentence, "increased" is taken as a verb ?

Thanks
Surabhi
Show more
Hi Surabhi, I believe you are referring to the following:

Income taxes increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002.

increased is indeed a verb here. This is similar to:

Prices increased significantly in 2021.

Again, increased is a verb here.

On the other hand, in the following construct:

hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms

prevented is not used as a simple past tense verb, but as a past participle.

Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses this distinction 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.
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
 [1]
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 03 Aug 2021, 08:47
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
psurabhi
I do not understand why in this sentence, "increased" is taken as a verb ?

Thanks
Surabhi
Show more
Hello, Surabhi. Let me say first that I agree with everything Ashish has written above. I only wanted to draw more attention to how you can tell the difference between a verb and a participle. It really has to do with the type of verb that follows the noun, but all you have to do is focus on those two elements, noun and verb/participle. Consider:

1) taxes increased—Here, "taxes" could form the subject of a sentence, and "increased" could form a verb in the simple past tense. This is a standalone sentence.

2) hurricanes prevented—Here, "hurricanes" could form the subject of a sentence, the same as before, but "prevented" is not a verb that can stand alone. It needs an object to function as a verb. (As an aside, think of a verb such as to be. You could not have a sentence that said, Hurricanes are. You would need a what to define or describe the noun.)

Looking at the sentence you mentioned earlier, we need to find that object—i.e. hurricanes prevented X from [something]—to classify "prevented" as a verb.

hurricanes prevented from forming by artificial "reefs" of precisely shaped marine platforms

Notice that there is no element X between "prevented" and "from"; neither can we argue that X follows in an inverted structure—i.e. hurricanes prevented from forming X... How can we tell? Because no standalone noun follows. Rather, we see two phrases: "by artificial 'reefs'" and "of precisely shaped marine platforms." Neither of these phrases could fit in our structure:

3) hurricanes prevented by artificial "reefs"—Now the reefs are apparently preventing the hurricanes, but we would still need a verb such as "are" to turn this into a sentence.

4) hurricanes prevented of precisely shaped marine platforms—This one breaks down altogether.

Take out the parts in red, and you could see "prevented" function as a verb (in a different sentence).

5) hurricanes prevented artificial "reefs" from...

6) hurricanes prevented marine platforms from...

In short, in the absence of the above cues, we know we must be dealing with a non-verb, or a participle, when we encounter "prevented" in the given context.

I hope this information may prove useful to you and others. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew
User avatar
Crytiocanalyst
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jun 2021
Last visit: 27 May 2023
Posts: 950
Own Kudos:
208
Given Kudos: 309
Posts: 950
Kudos: 208
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 30 Aug 2021, 06:03
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
generis
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 by 2002.
Show more

A) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002
when refering about a specific time have is not required therefore out

B) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to being up to 48 percent by 2002
being is always a red flag in Gmat therefore out
were upyo isn'tthe right usage therefore out

C) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were up to 48 percent
Similar flaws as A and B

D) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent
and by isn't the right usage therefore out

E) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002
This has all the perfect usage therefore in

Therefore IMO E
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 16 Oct 2022, 13:20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
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 by 2002.

A) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

B) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to being up to 48 percent by 2002

C) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were up to 48 percent

D) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent

E) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002
Show more
Hi Experts,
When I saw the semicolon after 'revenues' I was sure that there must have another independent clause after the semicolon. Then I was supposed to choose from choice A, B, and C as they used verb 'have increased', but unfortunately they (A,B,C) are wrong choice. I did not choose choice D and E because it seems that ''increased from...'' could make the sentence as modifier!

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 INCREASED FROM 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002 VERB blah blah blah....
How do a non-native can easily understand that ''increased from' has been used as 'verb', but not 'modifier'?
Can I have your suggestion, please? Thanks...
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,763
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,763
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 17 Oct 2022, 05:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TheUltimateWinner
Quote:
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 by 2002.

A) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

B) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to being up to 48 percent by 2002

C) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were up to 48 percent

D) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent

E) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002
Hi Experts,
When I saw the semicolon after 'revenues' I was sure that there must have another independent clause after the semicolon. Then I was supposed to choose from choice A, B, and C as they used verb 'have increased', but unfortunately they (A,B,C) are wrong choice. I did not choose choice D and E because it seems that ''increased from...'' could make the sentence as modifier!

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 INCREASED FROM 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002 VERB blah blah blah....
How do a non-native can easily understand that ''increased from' has been used as 'verb', but not 'modifier'?
Can I have your suggestion, please? Thanks...
Show more

Hello TheUltimateWinner,

We hope this finds you well.

In some cases, the past participle form of a verb is identical to its simple past tense form, so you need to pay attention to the meaning of the sentence and judge whether the verb form can logically function as an active verb, and whether it is appropriate for it to do so, in context.

Here, we know that what follows the semicolon must be an independent clause with an active verb, so logically, "increased" must be an active verb in the simple past tense.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
tukaisg
User avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2022
Last visit: 06 Oct 2024
Posts: 24
Own Kudos:
18
Given Kudos: 51
WE:Engineering (Telecommunications)
Posts: 24
Kudos: 18
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 16 Nov 2022, 00:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
gamebredfighter
GMATNinja could u please explain this question
The major decision points here have been eloquently addressed by AndrewN, AjiteshArun, and others, but I'm happy to summarize.

Quote:
(A) 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 by 2002.
As others have noted, the big problem here is the use of the present perfect, "have increased." When we use present perfect, we're communicating the notion that an action began in the past and continues into the present.

But that's not the case here. The increase happened entirely in the past, from 1962 to 2002, so we want a simple past tense verb, not a present perfect one.

(A), (B), and (C) all have the same verb tense error, so they're out.

Quote:
(D) 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 increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent.
While this option corrects the tense issue, it introduces a meaning problem.

As soon as I see the phrase, "increased from 18 percent," I'm wondering "to what?" But we never get the "to y" phrase. This is a good illustration of how you can identify an idiom error by relying on logic and clarity instead of memorization. Sure, the correct idiom is "from x to y," but you didn't need to memorize that to see that it's difficult to understand the meaning of the phrase if we leave off the "to y" part.

Also, the use of "comma + and" makes it sound as though we're introducing a new idea, creating confusion about what was 48 percent. If you pore over the sentence, you can probably figure out what's happening, but it's confusing at best. I might take a look at (E) before I officially get rid of (D), but I'm immediately doubtful that (D) could be the correct answer.

Quote:
(E) 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 increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002.
Looks good. It uses the simple past tense for the increase between 1962 and 2002, and it's crystal clear that income taxes went from 18% at the start of the period to 48% at the end.

Because (E) corrects the verb tense issue and also addresses the meaning confusion introduced in (D), (E) is our winner.

I hope that helps!
Show more


I have a query GMATNinja. If all these incidents are happening in the past, why the 1st part of the sentence introduces the present perfect tense?

Quote:
California has come more and more to rely on personal income taxes for its revenues;
Show more
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,763
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,763
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 16 Nov 2022, 02:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
generis
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 by 2002.

A) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

B) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to being up to 48 percent by 2002

C) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were up to 48 percent

D) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent

E) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

SC00150.02
Show more

Concepts tested here: Tenses + Idioms + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• The simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past.
• The present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present.
• “from A to B” is an acceptable idiomatic construction; A and B must be comparable and parallel.
• “being” is only to be used when it is part of a noun phrase or represents the passive continuous verb tense; the use of passive continuous must be justified in the context.

A: Trap.
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the present perfect tense verb "have increased" to refer to an action that concluded in the past; remember, the simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past, and the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present.

B:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the present perfect tense verb "have increased" to refer to an action that concluded in the past; remember, the simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past, and the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present.
2/ Option B incorrectly uses "being", rendering it awkward and needlessly wordy; remember, “being” is only to be used when it is part of a noun phrase or represents the passive continuous verb tense; the use of passive continuous must be justified in the context.

C:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the present perfect tense verb "have increased" to refer to an action that concluded in the past; remember, the simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past, and the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present.
2/ Option C incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "from A ("18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962") and B ("by 2002 were up to 48 percent")" and fails to maintain parallelism between A and B; remember, “from A to B” is an acceptable idiomatic construction; A and B must be comparable and parallel.

D:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "from A ("18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962") and B ("by 2002 were 48 percent")" and fails to maintain parallelism between A and B; remember, “from A to B” is an acceptable idiomatic construction; A and B must be comparable and parallel.

E: Correct.
1/ This answer choice correctly uses the simple past tense verb "increased" to refer to an action that concluded in the past.
2/ Option E correctly uses the idiomatic construction "from A to B", maintaining parallelism between A ("18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962") and B ("48 percent by 2002")".
3/ Option E is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

Hence, E is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):



To understand the concept of "Present Perfect Tense" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



To understand the use of "Being" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,986
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,986
 [1]
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 31 Mar 2023, 03:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
generis
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 by 2002.

A) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

B) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to being up to 48 percent by 2002

C) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were up to 48 percent

D) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent

E) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

SC00150.02
Show more

This is what the sentence says:

California has come to rely more on personal IT for its revenue; Income taxes were 18% of the fund in 1962. They increased to 48% by 2002.


We need to focus on the clause after the semi colon – that income taxes increased from X in 1962 to Y by 2002.

C) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were up to 48 percent

D) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent


Options (C) and (D) use ‘comma + and’ after ‘from 18% of the fund in 1962.’ This is incorrect.
Comma + and will start a new clause/phrase or form a list but neither works here. After giving ‘from X …’ we need to give ‘to Y…’ Hence, we can eliminate options (C) and (D).

B) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to being up to 48 percent by 2002

Option (B) uses ‘to being up to 48%’ which is just an indirect and complicated way of saying ‘to 48%.’ Hence it is less preferable.

A) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

C) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were up to 48 percent

Also, 2002 is in the past (we assume the question was written when it is presented to us so we assume that the question was written in 2022). Hence, ‘have increased’ does not make sense.
Since the taxes increased from X in 1962 to Y in 2002, the entire increase happened in the past only. Had the sentence been ‘the taxes have increased from X in 1962 to Y this year,’ then the use of ‘have increased’ would have made sense.

Hence, options (A), (B) and (C) are incorrect.

E) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

Then, only option (E) is left which has no errors. Note that the use of ‘by’ before 2002 instead of ‘in’ as done before 1962 is not a parallelism problem. We like as much parallelism as we can get but it is not necessary that every word must match. Since we are talking about an ‘increase,’ the use of ‘by’ is acceptable since it shows that it rose from 1962 to 2002 somewhat consistently.
Language does offer us this much flexibility.

Answer (E)
User avatar
lakshayvema12
User avatar
Joined: 07 Apr 2021
Last visit: 05 Nov 2024
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 133
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 22 Aug 2023, 03:17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
income taxes INCREASED FROM
like how can income taxes do the action of increasing isnt the increased is a verb ed modifier ?
and there is a semicolon so it has to be independent clause with a subject and a verb .

i do get the answer as E but by only poe ,but this question like why increased is not a verb ed modifier stayed in my mind .
still confused
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,986
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,986
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 22 Aug 2023, 05:10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
lakshayvema12
income taxes INCREASED FROM
like how can income taxes do the action of increasing isnt the increased is a verb ed modifier ?
and there is a semicolon so it has to be independent clause with a subject and a verb .

i do get the answer as E but by only poe ,but this question like why increased is not a verb ed modifier stayed in my mind .
still confused
Show more

'increase' is used as a verb in two different ways - with an object and without an object.

With an object: Someone increased something (to make greater)
He increased the amount of available oxygen in the chamber.

Without an object: Something increased (became greater)
The prices of all major grains increased last year.

It is the main verb in both cases here. Both sentences are in active voice.

In the following sentence, we have 'increased' as a modifier:
His salary, increased by his company last month, is enough for all his needs.
(The company increased the salary. Passive)

Here is a post on the difference between verb-ed as verb and as modifier: https://anaprep.com/how-to-differentiat ... modifiers/
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
Partly as a result of Proposition 13, which severely limits property 19 Sep 2023, 02:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
generis
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 by 2002.

A) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

B) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to being up to 48 percent by 2002

C) have increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were up to 48 percent

D) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962, and by 2002 were 48 percent

E) increased from 18 percent of the state's general fund in 1962 to 48 percent by 2002

SC00150.02
Show more
The term ''in 1962'' definitely indicates something that happened in the past. So, use of ''have increased-present timeline'' in choices A, B, and C is definitely wrong. What do you think, experts?
   1   2   3 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts