The owners of a fast growing tech start-up in Newport Beach organized

Question

Competition Mode Question

The owners of a fast growing tech start-up in Newport Beach organized the firm as a Limited Liability Company (LLC). The owners receive considerable personal liability  protection from potential lawsuits, and they also avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation .

(A) protection from potential lawsuits, and they also avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation
(B) protection from potential lawsuits and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation
(C) protection from potential lawsuits, avoiding some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation
(D) protection from potential lawsuits, and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company were set up as a C-corporation
(E) protection from potential lawsuits and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company were set up as a C-corporation

Archit3110 · Answer

subjunctive type
IMO E is correct
protection from potential lawsuits and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company were set up as a C-corporation

The owners of a fast growing tech start-up in Newport Beach organized the firm as a Limited Liability Company (LLC). The owners receive considerable personal liability  protection from potential lawsuits, and they also avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation.

(A) protection from potential lawsuits, and they also avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation
(B) protection from potential lawsuits and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation
(C) protection from potential lawsuits, avoiding some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation
(D) protection from potential lawsuits, and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company were set up as a C-corporation
(E) protection from potential lawsuits and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company were set up as a C-corporation

daagh · Answer

Answer is E for using the subjunctive conditional 'were' and 'would occur'.

exc4libur · Answer

MEANING
The owners RECEIVE protection from lawsuits and AVOID double-tax that WOULD occur IF the company WERE set up as a corporation.

Parallelism: receive and avoid;
Subjunctive (hypothetical situation): if…were;

Ans (E)

eakabuah · Answer

The right answer is option E.

This question tests two concepts: parallelism and hypothetical subjunctive.
Based on the correct usage of the hypothetical subjunctive, we can eliminate options A, B, and C for the use of the verb  was  instead of  were .
Between D and E, option E is rightly constructed in a parallel structure, expressing a parallelism between the verbs  avoid  and  receive . In option D, the comma before and, the parallelism marker, suggests that   avoid some egregious double taxation that would occur if the company were set up as a C-corporation   should be an independent clause, but this is not the case. We can therefore eliminate option D and keep E as the answer.

The owners of a fast-growing tech start-up in Newport Beach organized the firm as a Limited Liability Company (LLC). The owners  receive  considerable personal liability protection from potential lawsuits, and they also avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company was set up as a C-corporation.

(A) protection from potential lawsuits ,  and they also avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company  was  set up as a C-corporation
(B) protection from potential lawsuits and  avoid  some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company  was  set up as a C-corporation
(C) protection from potential lawsuits , avoiding  some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company  was  set up as a C-corporation
(D) protection from potential lawsuits ,  and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company  were  set up as a C-corporation
(E) protection from potential lawsuits and avoid some egregious double-taxation that would occur if the company  were  set up as a C-corporation

chaitralirr · Answer

The use of hypothetical condition by using if required the use of were instead of was. Eliminate A, B and C based on this. In between D and E the use of comma before the and is preferred.

IMO D

Posted from my mobile device

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

There are two main issues with this sentence.

(1) Since the double taxation would occur  if the company.. , we are dealing with a future hypothetical situation (or possibility) and must use the subjunctive mood. Consequently,  if the company were  must replace  if the company was .

(2) The two things that are true about the owners of the LLC must be parallel: they  receive...and avoid . The original sentence improperly breaks the parallelism (i.e., the phrase  receive..., and they also avoid  is not parallel).

A. the subjunctive mood is not used; the sentence is not parallel (i.e., the phrase  receive..., and they also avoid  is not parallel)
B. the subjunctive mood is not used
C. the subjunctive mood is not used; the sentence is not parallel (i.e., the phrase  receive..., avoiding  is not parallel)
D. the sentence is not parallel (i.e., the phrase  receive..., and avoid  is not parallel)
E. the subjunctive mood is used; the sentence is parallel (i.e., the phrase  receive... and avoid  is parallel)

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

The owners of a fast growing tech start-up in Newport Beach organized

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

The owners of a fast growing tech start-up in Newport Beach organized

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards