IMO D

We should be comparing significance of guiding principles to the economy with significance of particulars of the plan to the economy. Read below carefully as it might be confusing.

A - significance of guiding principles to the economy is compared with the particulars of the plan - wrong, it should be the significance of particulars of the plan, we need the verb here to show proper parallelism.
B - same as A verb is missing so wrong comparison
E - even greater significance is preferred over a significance even greater
C/E - uses have - wrong

IMO D.

fangtray wrote:The guiding principles of the tax plan released by the Treasure Department could have even a greater significance for the economy than the particulars of the plan.

a. even a greater significance for the economy than
b. a significance that is even greater for the economy than
c. even greater significance for the economy than have
d. even greater significance for the economy than do
e. a significance even greater for the economy than have

IMO: D

IMO : D

So C and D are the only competitor,

C - this is wrong.

Consider this :

I have more inclination towards Shakespeare than my brother do. We don't write :
I have more inclination towards Shakespeare than my brother have.

Please note: here "have" do not signify tenses.

Hope this helps !!

why is using have wrong and using do correct? the original sentence uses have. obviously that doesnt matter..but when i was doing the problem, i selected C instead of D.

in Avik.Ch's example:

I have more inclination towards shakespear than my brother do.
I have more inclination towards Shakespear than my brother have.

I feel like

I have more inclination towards shakesspear than my brother does/has

both sound gramatically correct. Why isn't has ok?

Because have is not helping verb in this sentence. The right helping verb is COULD. So, we can eliminate which sentences contain HAVE. Use DO is more correct

arggh... i still don't get why do works better than have.

The guiding principles of the tax plan released by the Treasure Department could have even greater significance for the economy than do the particulars of the plan.

I feel like it could say..

the guiding principles of the tax plan released by the T Department could have even greater signifiance for the economy than the particulars of the plan could have.[/u]

fangtray wrote:arggh... i still don't get why do works better than have.

The guiding principles of the tax plan released by the Treasure Department could have even greater significance for the economy than do the particulars of the plan.

I feel like it could say..

the guiding principles of the tax plan released by the T Department could have even greater signifiance for the economy than the particulars of the plan could have.[/u]

this is dependent on how verbs structured themselves.

I like to play football ----------> here we do not use the word "do" : but this is necessary for all underlying construction from this sentence :
Negative : I do like to play football ---> I do not like to play football.
Interrogative : I do like to play football ---> Do I like to play football ?

Now applying this here :

I love shakespear more than my brother do. --- the original one :
I do love shakespear more than my brother do love Shakespear. -- but this is not the way we write in real world, but this is the original construction.

Here : We are just changing the verb into a noun with have as a main verb :

I have more love for Shakespear than my brother do.
I do have more love for Shakespear than my brother do

-- now I think it's clear from where the "do" is coming and why "have" is wrong.

Please note : here "do" is a present tense that is not written and taken for granted. So this type of construction is not applicable when we have "have" as a perfect aspect.

Hope this helps !!

"Do" signifies all the action so it's essential in parallelism
(D) is the answer