Means Test - In re Wiegand Question
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:02 pm
charset="US-ASCII"
I've always thought line 57 was most appropriate unless the particular
trustee has an issue with where those deductions are listed within Form 22C.
Do all the ch13 trustees in the Central District pay close attention to
Wiegand? I would assume so since it often affects the applicable
commitment period.
Jeffrey Hsu, Esq. | JCH Law Firm
Orange County Office: 420 Exchange, Ste. 270 | Irvine, CA 92602
Los Angeles Office: 1031 S. Garfield Ave. | Alhambra, CA 91801
Tel: 800-371-5523 | Fax: 800-371-5523
jhsu@jchfirm.com |
www.jchfirm.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain information protected by
the attorney-client privilege, work-product doctrine, or other privileges.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If
you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email
and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended
recipient but do not wish to receive communications through this medium,
please so advise the sender immediately.
Dear members:
I have a PC that buys and sells cars. His income on line 3 of the 22C is
10,000 per month. Of this amount $5,000 is inventory and about $1,000 is
parts to fix the cars up so they can be sold. So am I reading the Wiegand
decision correctly to say that I can deduct the cost of inventory and parts
at LINE 57 for "SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES" contemplated by Section 1325(b)(2)
or does it have to be listed in PART VI as necessary for health and welfare
of family under 707?
R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
OFF: (818) 734-7223
CEL: (818) 554-9922
charset="US-ASCII"
The post was migrated from Yahoo.