- 22 -
it has just never been made specific and clear. I
would assume that * * * because they * * * [petitioner]
are doing things in gratitude for contributions and I
would think you would be more grateful for large
contributions than you would be for small
contributions. But I think it really goes to a price
list and I have never seen one and never heard of one
and never been told that X amount buys you X space,
because that would imply advertising.
When presented with an exhibit containing prices for various
sized spaces in The Constabulary, petitioner's expert testified:
"It looks like a price list to me."
We weigh expert testimony in light of the expert’s
qualifications as well as all the other credible evidence in the
record. Seagate Tech., Inc. & Consol. Subs. v. Commissioner, 102
T.C. 149, 186 (1994). We are not bound by the opinion of any
expert witness, and we will accept or reject that expert
testimony when, in our best judgment, based on the record, it is
appropriate to do so. Id., and the cases cited therein. While
we may choose to accept in its entirety the opinion of one
expert, we may also be selective in the use of any portion of
that opinion. Id.
We believe that the existence of a quid pro quo arrangement
is important to an analysis of whether the displays and listings
in The Constabulary constitute advertising. Because petitioner's
expert testified that she did not know that petitioner's
contributors were told that there was a relationship between the
amount of space a contributor's message received and the amount
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011