Page:Seiler v. Lucasfilm.pdf/1

1316  evidence of Congress’s intent to change to an objective “reasonable expectation of any profit” standard is required to warrant a deviation from existing statutory interpretation. I also find persuasive the Government’s argument that the statutory scheme is skewed by the majority’s interpretation. It makes section 108(b)’s presumptions favoring dealers and regular investors superfluous.

I would hold that the district court properly instructed the jury that the losses were deductible only if the Wehrlys’ primary motive for entering into the transactions was to make a profit, and would accordingly affirm.