"amount would be exempted" vs "amount would exempt"

Question

"amount would be exempted" vs "amount would exempt"

Both phrases are correct, but they are used in different contexts. 'Amount would be exempted' is used when referring to the action of exempting an amount, while 'amount would exempt' is used when referring to the amount itself having the quality of being exempt. They are not directly comparable as they serve different grammatical functions.

Last Updated: March 11, 2024

This phrase is used when referring to the action of exempting an amount from something, such as taxes or fees.

Examples:

The amount would be exempted from the new tax regulations.
The company decided that a certain amount would be exempted from the sales tax.

Alternatives:

The amount would be excluded
The amount would be waived
The amount would be removed
The amount would be spared
The amount would be left out

This phrase is used when referring to the amount itself having the quality of being exempt from something, such as taxes or fees.

Examples:

The exempt amount would not be subject to additional charges.
The exempt amount would not be included in the total.

Alternatives:

The amount would be exempt
The amount would not be subject to
The amount would be free from
The amount would be excluded from
The amount would be immune to

Answer 1

amount would be exempted

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

Answer 2

amount would exempt

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

"amount would be exempted" vs "amount would exempt"

amount would be exempted

amount would exempt

Related Comparisons