BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course
RedeemTarget Test Prep · GMAT
Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.
TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.
with Chris Peckover
with Logan Thompson
Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.
Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.
In many nations, criminal law does not apply to corporations, but in the United Stated today, a corporation commits a crime whenever one of its employees commits a crime, if the employee acted within the scope of his or her authority and if the corporation benefited as a result.
A. a corporation commits a crime whenever one of its employees commits a crime, if the employee acted
B. a corporation is committing a crime whenever one of its employees committed a crime, if those employees were acting
C. corporations commit a crime whenever one of its employees does, on the
condition that the employee acts
D. corporations commit crimes whenever an employee of those corporations commit a crime, if it was while acting
E. the corporation whose employees commit a crime, commits a crime, whenever the employee acted
I think the answer is C, it is the right answer?
Do those make sense? I can elaborate if needed.b) sequence of time is broken - is committing + committed
c) corporations-plural, possessive pronoun 'its' singular
d) corporations -many of them, an employee-one employee of those corporations? illogical sense
e) whose employees vs. the employee - which employee, unclear reference to one of the employees? illogical sense
Actually I thought that B is correct because of establishing an order that the company's crime follows that of an employee. Can't we use this way to establish an order?David@VeritasPrep wrote:PEMDAS pointed out there errors above:
Do those make sense? I can elaborate if needed.b) sequence of time is broken - is committing + committed
c) corporations-plural, possessive pronoun 'its' singular
d) corporations -many of them, an employee-one employee of those corporations? illogical sense
e) whose employees vs. the employee - which employee, unclear reference to one of the employees? illogical sense
New here Create free account
