- 9 -9
petitioner continued to work a 40-hour work week in concrete
construction. Petitioner briefly mentioned in his testimony that
he forwent supervisory positions in order to continue his
involvement in his son’s activities. The only evidence presented
to support this contention was petitioner’s own testimony:
For somebody with my skills, [the average earnings per
year are] anywhere from 40 to 50 thousand dollars and
upwards. Actually, the situation for me is that I – I
probably – I shouldn’t say probably – I know that I could
have been in supervisory positions from ‘93 on.
Before ‘93, I was in supervisory positions. At that
point, once I decided to manage Benjamin’s career, it was
impossible for me to work a lot of hours. I couldn’t work
the weekends. I had to take weeks off for national events.
Even without a supervisory position, petitioner earned
substantial income, $44,709, in the construction business during
1993. No evidence was presented indicating what amount of income
petitioner may have forgone by managing his son and participating
in the motocross activities. We do not find from petitioner’s
uncorroborated, self-serving, and irresolute testimony that
petitioner withdrew in any significant sense from his
construction job in order to pursue motocross.
This factor favors respondent.
4. Expectation That Property Used in the Activity Would
Appreciate in Value.
Petitioner did not invest in any property that would
appreciate in value.
This factor is neutral.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011