When we talk about something hypothetically, I believe we have to use conditional formatting of type 2, that is past tense, followed by past future tense. But I often see people use past tense followed by present tense instead as in the example shown below. Please kindly shed some light regarding this.
e.g. if the underlying asset was acquired by the vendor and is not subject to main residence exemption, there are no CGT consequences. Why don’t we say there would be no CGT consequences?
@Tony C posted:When we talk about something hypothetically, I believe we have to use conditional formatting of type 2, that is past tense, followed by past future tense. But I often see people use past tense followed by present tense instead as in the example shown below. Please kindly shed some light regarding this.
e.g. if the underlying asset was acquired by the vendor and is not subject to main residence exemption, there are no CGT consequences. Why don’t we say there would be no CGT consequences?
Hi, Tony—That type of conditional doesn't fit in with the three celebrated ESL types. It doesn't involve a prediction about the future (tentative or confident), nor is it a counterfactual conditional. It is simply asserting that if one thing (the underlying asset) possesses (right now) two properties (the properties of having been acquired by the vendor and of not being subject to "main residence exemption"), there are "no CGT consequences."
