Section 301

[AnjaliOberoi]

Section 301 of the 1988 Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act enables the United
States Trade Representative to single out a country as an unfair trader, begin trade
negotiations with that country, and, if the negotiations do not conclude by the United
States government's being satisfied, to impose sanctions.

A. by the United States government's being satisfied, to impose
B. by the United States government's satisfaction, impose
C. with the United States government's being satisfied, imposing
D. to the United States government's satisfaction, impose
E. to the United States government's satisfaction, imposing

OA D, why not E....imposing i think is correct to justify "if then"== "cause effect" relationship

[dimochka]

Hi AnjaliOberoi,

The reason the OA is not E is because you need to keep the verbs parallel. As the previous verbs describing the Rep's potential actions are single out and begin, the following verb needs to be in the same format: impose.

[theCodeToGMAT]

Section 301 of the 1988 Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act enables the United States Trade Representative to single out a country as an unfair trader, begin trade negotiations with that country, and, if the negotiations do not conclude by the United States government's being satisfied, to impose sanctions.

D. to the United States government's satisfaction, impose

E. to the United States government's satisfaction, imposing
INCORRECT; we need to maintain the parallelism...

[[email protected]]

Hi AnjaliOberoi,

Both dimochka and Rahul have correctly pointed out the parallelism rule that this SC is based on. This prompt is an example of a 3-item list, which always involves parallelism, and is a concept that you'll see in the Verbal section at least once on Test Day. Be on the lookout for it - it's a great way to pick up some easy points.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich