Sentence Correction

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.

my doubt : i eliminated A because this option has used "like" to introduce example .however i find that parallelism in A is best !!
A says :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
i find the underlined portion in A perfectly parallel

also my next best option would be D .option D has used "such as" however parallelism in D is somehow troubling me
D says: 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
my concern about D :though parallelism is oki grammatically in D but the expression "condominium associations have no more than 20 percent from other sources" does not seem correct

experts kindly help me with this
thanks and regards

What is the OA? and what's the source?

Stuck between A & D.. And yes, if we ignore "like", then {A} looks better than {D}

aditya8062 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.

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.

my doubt : i eliminated A because this option has used "like" to introduce example .however i find that parallelism in A is best !!
A says :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
i find the underlined portion in A perfectly parallel

also my next best option would be D .option D has used "such as" however parallelism in D is somehow troubling me
D says: 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
my concern about D :though parallelism is oki grammatically in D but the expression "condominium associations have no more than 20 percent from other sources" does not seem correct

experts kindly help me with this
thanks and regards

A: from other sources, like ground-floor rent for restaurants
Here, like serves to introduce an example of OTHER SOURCES.
On the GMAT, like means SIMILAR TO; it cannot serve to introduce examples.
The explanation for SC28 in the OG12 reads as follows:
Like is the wrong word to introduce examples.
Eliminate A.

B, C, D and E seem to imply following:
Condominium associations must HAVE from other sources no more than 20 percent of their gross income.
Here, the use of have is inappropriate.
The intended meaning is that condominium associations must RECEIVE from other sources no more than 20 percent of their gross income.
Eliminate B, C, D and E.

I don't see a correct answer here.
I recommend that you ignore this SC.

This is from the Veritas Prep question bank. The OA is A.

Here is the explanation:

Solution: A

Explanation: The primary difficulty in this question refers to a false decision point between "such as" and "like". Generally speaking, you use "such as" when what follows is an example of what precedes it and you use "like" when you are making a comparison. However, grammar experts do not agree on this usage and many top editors (including most at the New York Times) permit the usage of like in examples like "colors like pink and red." Be careful about applying rules that you think are strict when they really are not: in math 2 + 2 is always 4 but in grammar there are few absolutes. Therefore, at the end both "like" and "such as" are acceptable so you must find other decision points. In (B) there is no active verb as "requiring" is just a participle. In (C), (D), and (E) "have no more..." is incorrect: you do not "have 20% of your income from other sources" you "receive 20% of your income from other sources". Only (A) gets the predication correct: "require that associations receive at least 80% from this..., and no more than 20% from other sources" The comma confuses some students but it is there to make it clear that the first part ends after "from shareholders." The sentence is really "receive at least 80% from this and no more than 20% from this...". Answer is (A).

I was interested since I thought such as was the only way to go on this one...

But I found out that this is not the case. A wonderful essay by Mark Israel at https://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxlike00.html indicates that only the Little, Brown Handbook rules out "like" for examples and the other grammar books and dictionaries all allow "like" in place of "such as."

" Modern American Usage by Wilson Follett (Hill and Wang, 1966)
says: "Such as is close in meaning to like and may often be
interchanged with it. The shade of difference between them is that
such as leads the mind to imagine an indefinite group of objects
[...]. The other comparing word like suggests a closer
resemblance among the things compared [...]. [...P]urists object
to phrases of the type a writer like Shakespeare, a leader like
Lincoln. No writer, say these critics, is like Shakespeare; and
in this they are wrong; writers are alike in many things and the
context usually makes clear what the comparison proposes to our
attention. Such as Shakespeare may sound less impertinent, but
if Shakespeare were totally incomparable such as would be open to
the same objection as like." Bernstein, in Miss Thistlebottom's
Hobgoblins (Farrar, 1971), agrees, calling those who object to
"German composers like Beethoven" "nit-pickers"."

David@VeritasPrep wrote:This is from the Veritas Prep question bank. The OA is A.

Here is the explanation:

Solution: A

Explanation: The primary difficulty in this question refers to a false decision point between "such as" and "like". Generally speaking, you use "such as" when what follows is an example of what precedes it and you use "like" when you are making a comparison. However, grammar experts do not agree on this usage and many top editors (including most at the New York Times) permit the usage of like in examples like "colors like pink and red." Be careful about applying rules that you think are strict when they really are not: in math 2 + 2 is always 4 but in grammar there are few absolutes. Therefore, at the end both "like" and "such as" are acceptable so you must find other decision points. In (B) there is no active verb as "requiring" is just a participle. In (C), (D), and (E) "have no more..." is incorrect: you do not "have 20% of your income from other sources" you "receive 20% of your income from other sources". Only (A) gets the predication correct: "require that associations receive at least 80% from this..., and no more than 20% from other sources" The comma confuses some students but it is there to make it clear that the first part ends after "from shareholders." The sentence is really "receive at least 80% from this and no more than 20% from this...". Answer is (A).

I was interested since I thought such as was the only way to go on this one...

But I found out that this is not the case. A wonderful essay by Mark Israel at https://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxlike00.html indicates that only the Little, Brown Handbook rules out "like" for examples and the other grammar books and dictionaries all allow "like" in place of "such as."

" Modern American Usage by Wilson Follett (Hill and Wang, 1966)
says: "Such as is close in meaning to like and may often be
interchanged with it. The shade of difference between them is that
such as leads the mind to imagine an indefinite group of objects
[...]. The other comparing word like suggests a closer
resemblance among the things compared [...]. [...P]urists object
to phrases of the type a writer like Shakespeare, a leader like
Lincoln. No writer, say these critics, is like Shakespeare; and
in this they are wrong; writers are alike in many things and the
context usually makes clear what the comparison proposes to our
attention. Such as Shakespeare may sound less impertinent, but
if Shakespeare were totally incomparable such as would be open to
the same objection as like." Bernstein, in Miss Thistlebottom's
Hobgoblins (Farrar, 1971), agrees, calling those who object to
"German composers like Beethoven" "nit-pickers"."

Interesting stuff, David, but the only opinion that matters here is GMAC's, and GMAC has spoken on this issue.
As I mentioned in my post above, the OE for SC28 in the OG12 reads as follows:
"Like is the wrong word to introduce examples."