Can you analyse the grammar of ...

Your question appears rude to an English speaker.

"I am waiting for your analysis". This is how we speak to servants, or children.

Does the sentence seem ambiguous to you?

Sorry
I'am sorry, but I didn't mean it. Thanks for your reminding me of this usage.

What do you want to know about the syntax of the sentence?

How to analyse the grammar of ...
[The exemption of an exported product from duties or taxes borne by the like product when destined for domestic consumption, or the remission of such duties or taxes in amounts not in excess of those which have accrued, shall not be deemed to be a subsidy. ]

This is what I have in mind about the syntax of the above quote:

Step 1:
The exemption of ..., or the remission of ..., shall not be deemed to be a subsidy.
This should be the main elements of this sentence. Right?

Step 2:
The exemption of an exported product from duties or taxes borne
by the like product when destined for domestic consumption

The problem is where I should segment the sentence (part of this sentence) : Can I cut it like this so that it reads:

The exemption of an exported product from duties, or the exemption of an exported product from taxes borne by the like product when destined for domestic consumption. Is it okay?

OR

The exemption of an exported product from [duties or taxes]
[duties or taxes] borne by the like product when destined for domestic consumption, ...

I'd very much appreciate your kind help.
THANKS

I don't think the intent was to allow exemption of all duties.

While duties are normally for import and export there is no reason that a nation couldn't have domestic duties on products. So it makes more sense to keep "duties or taxes" together as an item.


If they were to be seperate, I would write the sentence as

The exemption of an exported product from duties or from taxes borne by the like product when destined for domestic consumption,

You are great!
You are great!
I'm for keeping "duties or taxes" together; but some of my students thought that the first way of analysing the sentence should be correct. So I brought the argument to this forum for support, and I got it. Thanks.