.jpg)
"Best Interests" and costs of sale - Chapter 11
John:
I don't have any idea to which case she is referring. If I were you I would call the judge's law clerk and see if the clerk will give you a hint. If you find out, I have one in a couple of weeks before the same judge, so keep us posted.
d
Dennis McGoldrick, 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B, Torrance, Ca 90503 310-328-1001-voice
> On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:02 PM, "John D. Faucher" wrote:
>
> Hello Brain Trust:
> I tried to confirm a chapter 11 plan in front of Judge Riblet last week. One reason it didn't confirm was that the judge found that it did not meet the "best interests" of creditors test, 1129(a)(7)(A)(ii).
> Judge Riblet announced that I had miscalculated the equity available to unsecured creditors, because I had factored in an 8 percent cost of sale for a $3.6 million apartment building, and I had also factored in the capital gains taxes on the property. These don't belong, she said, because of recent case law.
> I've looked and can't find any such case. All I see is that I am supposed to present the results of a hypothetical chapter 7 liquidation, which would definitely incur costs of sale and capital gains taxes. Does anyone know why she might think they don't apply in this test?
>
>
> John D. Faucher
> Faucher & Associates
> 818/889-8080
>
On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:02 PM, "John D. Faucher" <j.d.faucher@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Hello Brain Trust:
I tried to confirm a chapter 11 plan in front of Judge Riblet last week. One reason it didn't confirm was that the judge found that it did not meet the "best interests" of creditors test, 1129(a)(7)(A)(ii).
Judge Riblet announced that I had miscalculated the equity available to unsecured creditors, because I had factored in an 8 percent cost of sale for a $3.6 million apartment building, and I had also factored in the capital gains taxes on the property. These don't belong, she said, because of recent case law.
I've looked and can't find any such case. All I see is that I am supposed to present the results of a hypothetical chapter 7 liquidation, which would definitely incur costs of sale and capital gains taxes. Does anyone know why she might think they don't apply in this test?
John D. Faucher
Faucher & Associates818/889-8080
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
A trustee was just asking me today what the client's basis was in property
she sold in a case in which I represent creditors because she will have to
pay the IRS.
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 3:02 PM, John D. Faucher
wrote:
> **
>
>
> Hello Brain Trust:
> I tried to confirm a chapter 11 plan in front of Judge Riblet last week.
> One reason it didn't confirm was that the judge found that it did not meet
> the "best interests" of creditors test, 1129(a)(7)(A)(ii).
> Judge Riblet announced that I had miscalculated the equity available to
> unsecured creditors, because I had factored in an 8 percent cost of sale
> for a $3.6 million apartment building, and I had also factored in the
> capital gains taxes on the property. These don't belong, she said, because
> of recent case law.
> I've looked and can't find any such case. All I see is that I am supposed
> to present the results of a hypothetical chapter 7 liquidation, which would
> definitely incur costs of sale and capital gains taxes. Does anyone know
> why she might think they don't apply in this test?
>
>
> John D. Faucher
> Faucher & Associates
> *818/889-8080*
>
>
>
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 2920
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw.com
*Board Certified - Business Bankruptcy Law - American Board of Certification
*Board Certified - Consumer Bankruptcy Law - American Board of Certification
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
AND SANTA BARBARA AND THE WORLD FOR CHAPTER 11 AND 15 CASES.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed
by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
A trustee was just asking me today what the client's basis was in property she sold in a case in which I represent creditors because she will have to pay the IRS.
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 3:02 PM, John D. Faucher <j.d.faucher@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Can't help you with cases, but argument is that since you are not selling the property, you don't get to deduct the expenses related to sale or the taxes related to same.
David A. Tilem
Law Offices of David A. Tilem
206 N. Jackson St., #201
Glendale, CA 91206
Tel: 818-507-6000 * Fax: 818-507-6800
www.TilemLaw.com
[http://www.tilemlaw.com/images/cblsLogo.gif]
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hello Brain Trust:
I tried to confirm a chapter 11 plan in front of Judge Riblet last week.
One reason it didn't confirm was that the judge found that it did not meet
the "best interests" of creditors test, 1129(a)(7)(A)(ii).
Judge Riblet announced that I had miscalculated the equity available to
unsecured creditors, because I had factored in an 8 percent cost of sale
for a $3.6 million apartment building, and I had also factored in the
capital gains taxes on the property. These don't belong, she said, because
of recent case law.
I've looked and can't find any such case. All I see is that I am supposed
to present the results of a hypothetical chapter 7 liquidation, which would
definitely incur costs of sale and capital gains taxes. Does anyone know
why she might think they don't apply in this test?
John D. Faucher
Faucher & Associates
*818/889-8080*
Hello Brain Trust:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.