(A) The British hospitality industry’s cost to address issues related to the new and more stringent visa regulations is projected at $2 billion by the end of the decade.
ı think cost to address stands a little bit off. First of all, ı would have expected something nicer, or idiomatic, such as cost of addressing... to British industry....Because, receiver of the action of costing is the industry, in other words, cost of addressing issues costs to the industry.
Also, though ı am not sure, cost is projected by the end of decade mixes timeline a little bit. ı think cost should be modified by "by the end of decade"
(B) The British hospitality industry’s cost by the end of the decade to address issues related to the new and more stringent visa regulations is estimated at $2 billion a year.
cost to address stands off. Receiver of the action of costing is the industry, in other words, cost of addressing issues costs to the industry.
(C) By the end of the decade, the British hospitality industry’s cost of addressing issues related to the new and more stringent visa regulations is projected at $2 billion a year.
By the end of decade, cost of addressing is projected...This one mixes timelines as if to tell that cost is projected by the end of decade
(D) It is estimated that by the end of the decade the cost to the British hospitality industry of addressing issues related to the new and more stringent visa regulations will be over $2 billion a year.
Correct(E) To address issues related to the new and more stringent visa regulations, the cost to the British hospitality industry is estimated at over $2 billion a year by the end of the decade.
Meaning is off. This one tells that cost is estimated in order to address issues