Explanation
Creating a filter: in the original sentence, the
conditional tense in "would increase" is appropriate; the law isn't in effect
yet, so the effect is expressed in the conditional tense. However, the verb
tense in the phrase "have been allowed to build" isn't correct; it indicates,
contrary to the intended meaning, that the law is changing what carmakers were
allowed to do in the recent past.
Applying the filter: choice (B) has the same problem. Choices
(C) and (E) fail to use "would." Could such the indicative (normal) verb tense
be correct here? It could be a reasonable intended meaning of a sentence
similar to this one that the bill will
pass with certainty and the effect will take place. However, we can
infer that the intended meaning of the sentence in this question is different,
because it refers to a "proposed" law. The law, evidently, will not necessarily
pass, so the intended meaning is conveyed by the conditional tense, not by the
indicative tense. Furthermore, (C) uses the unidiomatic "tint amount," while
(E) uses the unidiomatic "allowed for windows by carmakers." The correct answer
is (D).
If you believe you have found an error in this question or explanation, please contact us and include the question title or URL in your message.