- 252 -
Mr. Cravens' testimony would not have changed Judge Goffe's
conclusion that the test case petitioners had no business purpose
for participating in the Kersting programs. Judge Goffe relied
upon factors common to all test case petitioners in rejecting
their testimony that they had entered into the Kersting
transactions with a view towards making a profit on stock
appreciation. Specifically, Judge Goffe found that the test case
petitioners participated in the Kersting programs without regard
to whether the purchase price for the stock that they purported
to purchase was reasonable and appropriate, and without specific
knowledge about the Kersting corporations involved, the
industries in which they operated, or the impact of prevailing
economic conditions on their investment decisions. Under the
circumstances, we are convinced that Mr. Cravens' pro se status
was not material to Judge Goffe's holding that the test case
petitioners had no business purpose for participating in the
Kersting transactions.
We are also convinced that Mr. Cravens' testimony was not
material to Judge Goffe's holding that the test case petitioners
lacked a business purpose for participating in the Kersting
programs. In particular, although Mr. Cravens testified that he
participated in the Kersting programs mainly for the tax
benefits, we are convinced, upon the basis of Judge Goffe's
comprehensive analysis of the test case petitioners' lack of
business purpose, that Mr. Cravens' testimony on this point was
Page: Previous 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011