It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 10:32

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 03 Mar 2013
Posts: 48

Kudos [?]: 644 [16], given: 30

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 3
WE: Information Technology (Telecommunications)
Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2013, 04:44
16
KUDOS
60
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

43% (01:24) correct 57% (01:23) wrong based on 2877 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.

A) Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.

B) Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” requiring that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.

C) Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.

D) Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.

E) Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and to have no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

KUDOS is always a good way to thank anyone.
It encourages someone to post more questions and also answers.

KUDOS Please if My post helps you in anyway. Your Kudos keep me alive

Kudos [?]: 644 [16], given: 30

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4311

Kudos [?]: 8173 [9], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2013, 06:33
9
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
All I know is that A cannot be the choice, since A is using like to state examples. The text is not comparing ground floor rents with anything. It is an example of income from other sources. This is a fatal error.

Among others:

B Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants. --- This is a fragment without a finite verb for the main clause

C Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.—This is a classic subjunctive mood clause. Looks perfect to me; the three essentials are present: The command word ‘required’ is there; that is there; and the verb of the sub-clause is base form (receive, have no more

D. Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and to have no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants. --- This is another version of C, wherein the infinitives are used instead of base verbs; again perfectly befitting, IMO.

E; Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and to have no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.—as wrong as A for using like for examples.

Between C and D, it is difficult to make out, unless there is a reason for preferring one over the other. I personally prefer C because of the sunbjuntiveness of the mood
_________________

Can you solve at least some SC questions without delving into the initial statement?

Narendran 98845 44509

Kudos [?]: 8173 [9], given: 364

Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 156

Kudos [?]: 213 [0], given: 67

Location: Poland
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2013, 08:26
I agree with dagh.
daagh wrote:
C Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.—This is a classic subjunctive mood clause. Looks perfect to me; the three essentials are present: The command word ‘required’ is there; that is there; and the verb of the sub-clause is base form (receive, have no more

I know the form of infinitive without "to" as "bare", not "base" infinitive. Are these names interchangeable?

thelosthippie wrote:
D) Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.

IMO this one is also correct: "require" works as well with Command Subjunctive (as in C) as with "to infinitive". Manhattan SC mentions that on page 114. Also, the "to" before have in the second clause can be legally omitted.

As to refuting A as the correct answer I fully agree with daagh.

I would also choose C with the Command Subjunctive mood, because the passage describes a tax regulation, so formal English is better suited here and Command Subjunctive is an instrument in formal language.
_________________

If I answered your question with this post, use the motivating power of kudos!

Kudos [?]: 213 [0], given: 67

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4311

Kudos [?]: 8173 [0], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2013, 18:51
@HumptyDumpty:
I only referred to as base verb that is the first form of any verb structure such as receive, received, received; jump. jumped, jumped etc., and not any bare infinitive. How can we exchange a verb with an infinitive, bare or no bare
_________________

Can you solve at least some SC questions without delving into the initial statement?

Narendran 98845 44509

Kudos [?]: 8173 [0], given: 364

Manager
Status: Looking to improve
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 174

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 65

GMAT 1: 530 Q43 V20
GMAT 2: 560 Q42 V25
GMAT 3: 650 Q48 V31
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2013, 19:16

The error is like used for examples instead of such as. The issue with C is required (past tense) is combined with infinitive - to receive (which typically shows intent).

I think required that goes with receive and require goes with to receive
_________________

KUDOS is a way to say Thank You

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 65

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1126

Kudos [?]: 3552 [3], given: 123

Location: United States
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 01:00
3
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
nt2010 wrote:

The error is like used for examples instead of such as. The issue with C is required (past tense) is combined with infinitive - to receive (which typically shows intent).

Hi nt2010.
I'm on the same boat, IMO D is better than A because A use "like" to mention examples.

Quote:
I think required that goes with receive and require goes with to receive

Not necessarily, past tense or present tense doesn't matter. Correct idioms are:
require X to do Y
require that X do Y (without to)

C is wrong because:.........required X.....to receive.............and have.........
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Kudos [?]: 3552 [3], given: 123

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1126

Kudos [?]: 3552 [0], given: 123

Location: United States
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 01:06
daagh wrote:
All I know is that A cannot be the choice, since A is using like to state examples. The text is not comparing ground floor rents with anything. It is an example of income from other sources. This is a fatal error.

Among others:

B Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants. --- This is a fragment without a finite verb for the main clause

C Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.—This is a classic subjunctive mood clause. Looks perfect to me; the three essentials are present: The command word ‘required’ is there; that is there; and the verb of the sub-clause is base form (receive, have no more

D. Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and to have no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants. --- This is another version of C, wherein the infinitives are used instead of base verbs; again perfectly befitting, IMO.

E; Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and to have no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.—as wrong as A for using like for examples.

Between C and D, it is difficult to make out, unless there is a reason for preferring one over the other. I personally prefer C because of the sunbjuntiveness of the mood

Hi daagh.
I think you switched the order of C and D? As you explained, D should be correct? Please confirm. Thanks
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Kudos [?]: 3552 [0], given: 123

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Posts: 461

Kudos [?]: 282 [0], given: 59

Location: India
GPA: 2.5
WE: Operations (Hospitality and Tourism)
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 01:21
So, finally what is the correct OA. Between A and D. I mistook A for use of like to introduce noun, not example.
_________________

"When the going gets tough, the tough gets going!"

Bring ON SOME KUDOS MATES+++

-----------------------------

My GMAT journey begins: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-gmat-journey-begins-122251.html

Kudos [?]: 282 [0], given: 59

Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 156

Kudos [?]: 213 [1], given: 67

Location: Poland
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 04:43
1
KUDOS
pqhai wrote:
C is wrong because:.........required X.....to receive.............and have.........

This form is correct, it is NOT an error. The second "to" is usually omitted by two infinitives, just as any other repetition in parallel structures. E.g.:

The reporter wants to go and (to) interview the celebrity in person.
Tom is doing his homework and (is) listening to music.

Compare: GMAT Club Grammar Book, p. 75.

nt2010 wrote:

(...)The issue with C is required (past tense) is combined with infinitive - to receive (which typically shows intent).

I think required that goes with receive and require goes with to receive

No such error exists in C.

First, the "required" is not a parallel to the "receive". After "required to" two verbs are used in a correct parallel structure: receive (at least...) and have (no more...). Moreover, the "required" in the Simple Past tense is correct here, as there is "Until 2010" at the beginning of the sentence.
[Reveal] Spoiler: On "until"
"Until" means "up to (the point in time or the event mentioned)", therefore it calls for using relative tense. Proper use of "Until":
Until you find the key, we shall/will not be able to get in.
I am not coming until I am asked.
I did not know until you told me.

Second, "required that" implements a Command Subjunctive, which is a mood in English language and will always go with bare infinitive form. Furthermore, as you wrote: "require goes with to receive" - this is misunderstood. The preposition "to" belongs not to the "receive" here, but to the "require". The idiomatic form is Require sb to do sh, just as pqhai wrote:
pqhai wrote:
require X to do Y
require that X do Y (without to)

I can only add that the second structure is the Command Subjunctive mood (CSM).

[Reveal] Spoiler: On CSM
The only correct structure of the Command Subjunctive mood is as presented in the sentence, i.e.: bossy verb + that + bare infinitive. E.g.: We demand that he be here.; The assembly proposed that the schoolboard disband.; The chairman suggested that the CEO redeploy.

Hence, both C and D are grammatically and logically correct.
_________________

If I answered your question with this post, use the motivating power of kudos!

Kudos [?]: 213 [1], given: 67

Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 156

Kudos [?]: 213 [19], given: 67

Location: Poland
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 05:11
19
KUDOS
10
This post was
BOOKMARKED
On the other hand!:

I found some rationale of A:

Most of us rejected A because the "like" is used to introduce an example.
Well, it is not.
The "like" introduces a comparison here and is thus used correctly.

Quote:
A) Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.

The ground floor rent IS NOT one of income sources for the condominum associations (CAs), but it IS one of income sources for restaurants. So, the "other sources" for CAs are compared to the other sources for restaurants (such as ground-floor rent), and the "ground-floor rent" is not an income source for CAs, thus it is not an example of "other sources" for CAs.

This is the case with the "like".

Further, "required that" uses correct Command Subjunctive. As to the previous posts, the "have" in the second clause can be omitted without any damage to the sentence. It is redundant. The comma before ", and" is also correctly placed, as a comma between two long parallel clauses should be (also before the coordinating conjunction and!).

A is the best answer choice, though hellishly convoluted. Perhaps we all fell victims to the inflexible way of thinking, putting an obtuse grammar rule way above... thinking .
_________________

If I answered your question with this post, use the motivating power of kudos!

Kudos [?]: 213 [19], given: 67

Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3375

Kudos [?]: 9286 [1], given: 1169

Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 06:01
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Me too in a first instance picked C.

but as usual is important to revise a question in particular whan you pick it wrong and is difficult such this question.

So: if we look at the sentence ONLY from the meaning standing point in B C D and E (I do not see anything else: no like no other grammar rule) have or to have it's like an huge black hole.

It doesn't hold anywater. Completely syupid to think (for me of course) to solely think to the other answer choices......

The meaning guys..........is the key in such SC.

regards
_________________

Kudos [?]: 9286 [1], given: 1169

Manager
Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 63

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 4

Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2013, 20:46
daagh wrote:
All I know is that A cannot be the choice, since A is using like to state examples. The text is not comparing ground floor rents with anything. It is an example of income from other sources. This is a fatal error.

Among others:

B Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants. --- This is a fragment without a finite verb for the main clause

C Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.—This is a classic subjunctive mood clause. Looks perfect to me; the three essentials are present: The command word ‘required’ is there; that is there; and the verb of the sub-clause is base form (receive, have no more

D. Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and to have no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants. --- This is another version of C, wherein the infinitives are used instead of base verbs; again perfectly befitting, IMO.

E; Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and to have no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.—as wrong as A for using like for examples.

Between C and D, it is difficult to make out, unless there is a reason for preferring one over the other. I personally prefer C because of the sunbjuntiveness of the mood

Can somebody explain me what is the main clause in B

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 4

Manager
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 208

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 40

Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 710 Q44 V44
GMAT 2: 740 Q48 V44
GPA: 3.1
WE: Sales (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2013, 23:16
"the law required that" seems idiomatically correct

On the flip side, the phrase "until 2010" would seem to set off the infinitive form of "to receive" because the receiving happened on an ongoing basis that was subsequent to the law but ceased before the present

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 40

Intern
Joined: 25 Jul 2012
Posts: 29

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 56

Location: India
GMAT Date: 08-03-2013
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2013, 08:35
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
HumptyDumpty wrote:
On the other hand!:

I found some rationale of A:

Most of us rejected A because the "like" is used to introduce an example.
Well, it is not.
The "like" introduces a comparison here and is thus used correctly.

Quote:
A) Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.

The ground floor rent IS NOT one of income sources for the condominum associations (CAs), but it IS one of income sources for restaurants. So, the "other sources" for CAs are compared to the other sources for restaurants (such as ground-floor rent), and the "ground-floor rent" is not an income source for CAs, thus it is not an example of "other sources" for CAs.

This is the case with the "like".

Further, "required that" uses correct Command Subjunctive. As to the previous posts, the "have" in the second clause can be omitted without any damage to the sentence. It is redundant. The comma before ", and" is also correctly placed, as a comma between two long parallel clauses should be (also before the coordinating conjunction and!).

A is the best answer choice, though hellishly convoluted. Perhaps we all fell victims to the inflexible way of thinking, putting an obtuse grammar rule way above... thinking .

Thanks for the explanation. Here meaning of the sentence is playing the major role.

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 56

Manager
Status: Looking to improve
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 174

Kudos [?]: 73 [1], given: 65

GMAT 1: 530 Q43 V20
GMAT 2: 560 Q42 V25
GMAT 3: 650 Q48 V31
Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2013, 10:53
1
KUDOS
Just trying to understand the structure <clause>, <and clause> pattern..

If A is OA, what is the verb in the phrase after and

Quote:
and no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants

_________________

KUDOS is a way to say Thank You

Kudos [?]: 73 [1], given: 65

Intern
Joined: 06 Aug 2013
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2013, 04:32
C is the answer coz 'like ' can never be used for examples, it is always 'such as'

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Intern
Joined: 03 Dec 2011
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: 71 [2], given: 8

Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2013, 08:50
2
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hey guys,

My first post here. I'm more of a passive user

From what I understand, this question makes use of the "bossy verbs" - referring to words such as "required", "proposed", "demanded".
Bossy verbs are, in most cases, followed by "that" (commanded that, required that etc).
So, vertical scanning leaves us with options A, B and D.
B and D are eliminated because of such as (like is preferred because there is a direct comparison).
_________________

Kudos if the post helped!

The heights by great men reached and kept were not attained by sudden flight, but they, while their companions slept, were toiling upward in the night. -H.W. Longfellow

Kudos [?]: 71 [2], given: 8

Intern
Joined: 23 Jul 2013
Posts: 24

Kudos [?]: 49 [3], given: 27

Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2013, 09:06
3
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
thelosthippie wrote:
Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.

Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.

Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” requiring that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.

Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.

Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required that condominium associations receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and have no more than 20 percent from other sources, such as ground-floor rent for restaurants.

Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the “80-20 rule” required condominium associations to receive at least 80 percent of their gross income from their tenant-shareholders, and to have no more than 20 percent from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants.

Like is used correctly. "Ground-floor rent for restaurants" is not an example of other sources. It's being compared to condominium rent. Like=similar to. Income from their tenant-shareholders is similar to ground-floor rent for restaurants. The only answer choices left are A & E. E seems wordy & "to have no more" sounds a bit off to me

Please give me kudos if my post has helped you

Kudos [?]: 49 [3], given: 27

Manager
Joined: 23 May 2013
Posts: 122

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 110

Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jan 2014, 08:46
hi..can some please explain : why A is incorrect - which implies that 'like' is used to compare gross income from their tenant-shareholders and ground-floor rent for restaurants

how does the meaning imply that its not an example and it represents comparison. Clearly i am missing the point.
thanks
_________________

“Confidence comes not from always being right but from not fearing to be wrong.”

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 110

Intern
Joined: 09 Mar 2014
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2014, 15:02
There is a big problem with D!!

and have no more than 20 percent from other sources is wrong.Have should not be used here...

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: Until 2010, a state tax regulation known as the 80-20 rule   [#permalink] 30 Mar 2014, 15:02

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 45 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by