Where’s Chasi’s argument? Can you make a list of why your tax forms went falsified? What are your views on the sentence even in the version with ‘can’?

The higher percentage is due to more intentional misstatements, BUT presumably it may also be due to the fact that the fraud department has started doing more work than ever to cover the fraud cases.

Is it true that another source refers to a different use of could where there really is a causal link. Is it

possible to buy a car, and I can just make a sale?

Here making the sales is stated as prerequisite for getting the car. Even in this case it could happen that I unexpectedly inherit a fortune and I thus will still be able to buy the car regardless of the outcome of the sale, but I am expressing ‘that making the sale will allow me to buy the car.’’

In the original question the difference between a can and could is mainly how sure you are that there are intentional misstatements and that they affect the percentage. If you know there are intentional misstatements that do affect the results can is more appropriate. If you’re not sure whether there are any or if they affect the percent could is more appropriate IMO.

Where’s Chasi’s argument? Can you make a list of why your tax forms went falsified? What are your views on the sentence even in the version with ‘can’?

The higher percentage is due to more intentional misstatements, BUT presumably it may also be due to the fact that the fraud department has started doing more work than ever to cover the fraud cases.

Is it true that another source refers to a different use of could where there really is a causal link. Is it

possible to buy a car, and I can just make a sale?

Here making the sales is stated as prerequisite for getting the car. Even in this case it could happen that I unexpectedly inherit a fortune and I thus will still be able to buy the car regardless of the outcome of the sale, but I am expressing ‘that making the sale will allow me to buy the car.’’

In the original question the difference between a can and could is mainly how sure you are that there are intentional misstatements and that they affect the percentage. If you know there are intentional misstatements that do affect the results can is more appropriate. If you’re not sure whether there are any or if they affect the percent could is more appropriate IMO.

Where’s Chasi’s argument? Can you make a list of why your tax forms went falsified? What are your views on the sentence even in the version with ‘can’?

The higher percentage is due to more intentional misstatements, BUT presumably it may also be due to the fact that the fraud department has started doing more work than ever to cover the fraud cases.

Is it true that another source refers to a different use of could where there really is a causal link. Is it

possible to buy a car, and I can just make a sale?

Here making the sales is stated as prerequisite for getting the car. Even in this case it could happen that I unexpectedly inherit a fortune and I thus will still be able to buy the car regardless of the outcome of the sale, but I am expressing ‘that making the sale will allow me to buy the car.’’

In the original question the difference between a can and could is mainly how sure you are that there are intentional misstatements and that they affect the percentage. If you know there are intentional misstatements that do affect the results can is more appropriate. If you’re not sure whether there are any or if they affect the percent could is more appropriate IMO.

Where’s Chasi’s argument? Can you make a list of why your tax forms went falsified? What are your views on the sentence even in the version with ‘can’?

The higher percentage is due to more intentional misstatements, BUT presumably it may also be due to the fact that the fraud department has started doing more work than ever to cover the fraud cases.

Is it true that another source refers to a different use of could where there really is a causal link. Is it

possible to buy a car, and I can just make a sale?

Here making the sales is stated as prerequisite for getting the car. Even in this case it could happen that I unexpectedly inherit a fortune and I thus will still be able to buy the car regardless of the outcome of the sale, but I am expressing ‘that making the sale will allow me to buy the car.’’

In the original question the difference between a can and could is mainly how sure you are that there are intentional misstatements and that they affect the percentage. If you know there are intentional misstatements that do affect the results can is more appropriate. If you’re not sure whether there are any or if they affect the percent could is more appropriate IMO.

Use could (not can ) to refer to conditional situations, in which something has to happen

and be the case in order for someone to be able to do something or for something else to occur Your sentence is clearly conditional, because the ” higher percentage of these tax returns being caught

as fraudulent ” has to happen for the ” intentional misstatements ” to occur. Is it also correct to use said in this situation?

Where’s Chasi’s argument? Can you make a list of why your tax forms went falsified? What are your views on the sentence even in the version with ‘can’?

The higher percentage is due to more intentional misstatements, BUT presumably it may also be due to the fact that the fraud department has started doing more work than ever to cover the fraud cases.

Is it true that another source refers to a different use of could where there really is a causal link. Is it

possible to buy a car, and I can just make a sale?

Here making the sales is stated as prerequisite for getting the car. Even in this case it could happen that I unexpectedly inherit a fortune and I thus will still be able to buy the car regardless of the outcome of the sale, but I am expressing ‘that making the sale will allow me to buy the car.’’

In the original question the difference between a can and could is mainly how sure you are that there are intentional misstatements and that they affect the percentage. If you know there are intentional misstatements that do affect the results can is more appropriate. If you’re not sure whether there are any or if they affect the percent could is more appropriate IMO.

Where’s Chasi’s argument? Can you make a list of why your tax forms went falsified? What are your views on the sentence even in the version with ‘can’?

The higher percentage is due to more intentional misstatements, BUT presumably it may also be due to the fact that the fraud department has started doing more work than ever to cover the fraud cases.

Is it true that another source refers to a different use of could where there really is a causal link. Is it

possible to buy a car, and I can just make a sale?

Here making the sales is stated as prerequisite for getting the car. Even in this case it could happen that I unexpectedly inherit a fortune and I thus will still be able to buy the car regardless of the outcome of the sale, but I am expressing ‘that making the sale will allow me to buy the car.’’

In the original question the difference between a can and could is mainly how sure you are that there are intentional misstatements and that they affect the percentage. If you know there are intentional misstatements that do affect the results can is more appropriate. If you’re not sure whether there are any or if they affect the percent could is more appropriate IMO.