.jpg)
Another Means Test Question
A really good post from another law list
David A. Tilem
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
* Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal
Specialization.
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: Another Means Test Question
The Supreme Court is hearing the case of Hamilton v. Lanning that discusses
the issue of adjusting the disposable income calculation based on the
realities of the debtors income on a going forward basis, whether positive
or negative. Most circuits have taken that position, the Ninth Circuit has
said no and we know how often the Ninth Circuit is right!
The point of providing tax returns is to allow parties to assess those
changes going forward one can assume the debtor will not hesitate to
modify his plan if his income goes down, but far from clear that he will
leap to increase the plan payments if his income goes up. If one does the
tax returns, its hard to see how much of a burden just providing them to
the trustee is as opposed to the possibility that his plan might have to
be adjusted.
In re Amidon, 423 B.R. 546 (Bankr. D. Id. 2010) is a recent case that sets
out one rationale for not allowing deduction of payments in Chapter 13 for
expenses that arent being paid.
Karen Cordry, Bankruptcy Counsel
National Association of Attorneys General
2030 M Street, N.W., 8th Floor
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 326-6025 (phone)
(202) 331-1427 (fax)
_____
The post was migrated from Yahoo.