In re Luban, No. 11-13633-BKC-AJC

In re Luban, No. 11-13633-BKC-AJC, 2012 WL 694515, at *1–*3 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. Mar. 1, 2012) (Cristol)

$200 additional operating expense in IRM is not allowable because not part of Local Standards transportation operating expenses. “[T]he Bankruptcy Code provides that a debtor’s expenses are to be defined by the standards promulgated by the IRS, not by the IRM; the IRM is neither incorporated into the IRS Local Standards nor the Bankruptcy Code. . . . The additional $200 operating expense that the Debtors seek is an adjustment which is not part of the Local Standards table and not included in the section of the IRM that outlines the Local Standards. . . . In [Ransom v. FIA Card Services, N.A., __ U.S. __, 131 S. Ct. 716, 178 L. Ed. 2d 603 (Jan. 11, 2011)], the Supreme Court expressly stated that the IRS guidelines are not incorporated into the Code. The Supreme Court used the IRM merely as commentary to assist it in interpreting statutory language. . . . The Debtors in this case do not seek to use the IRM to interpret statutory language but rather to create a new deduction that does not exist in the IRS Standards or the Code. . . . Debtors are not entitled to a deduction upon anticipating they may later incur additional expenses. . . . Debtors must actually incur some expense for a deduction to be considered applicable . . . . Debtors do not incur an additional $200 in operating expenses simply by virtue of the age of their cars. . . . [T]he law, as it exists, seems to punish the frugal. Had the Debtors bought and financed newer cars, prior to filing their bankruptcy petition, they probably would have qualified to pay less to their creditors and would not have to worry about the burden of higher maintenance expenses. Unfortunately, the Court must apply the law as it exists and not modify or change the law because of sympathy or the fact that the law might have been more logical.”

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

March 8, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Good faith in plan proposal. Plan was proposed in good faith, although petition was filed only 21 days after purchase of vehicle, when plan adequately protected creditor against risk of depreciation. Opinion reviews good faith factors for plan proposal. In re Sharp, 608 B.R. 546 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2019). Compare In re Broder,...
Members
ahern_larry_regular
February 5, 2023
Introduction This series reviews developments in bankruptcy procedure during 2022. Amendments to 16 rules and one new rule took effect December 1, 2022. Many reflected changes necessitated by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA),1 and have been in place in the same or similar form on an interim basis since that legislation took effect.
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
July 10, 2022
Failure of Chapter 13 debtors to satisfy post-petition property tax payments to the county, specifically required in the debtors’ Chapter 13 plan, renders the debtors ineligible for a discharge, even where the debtors proposed a loan modification to repay the mortgage creditor which had advanced the post-petition taxes. (Rodriguez) In re Villarreal, 2022 WL 1102223 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. April 12,...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
August 25, 2024
Once a Chapter 13 case is completed and the debtor receives a discharge, the trustee cannot seek to reopen the case for the purpose of grabbing an undisclosed, prepetition asset and then converting the case to a Chapter 7 so it could be administered.
Members
NBR cropped 2
December 29, 2024
From February, Prof. Rapoport looks at the question: What should happen when the Rule 2016 statement on compensation conflicts with the SOFA #16?
Members
DeCarlo01
October 16, 2022
The facts in In re DeWitt, 2022 WL 4588320 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2022), are a bit “unusual”. Debtor filed Chapter 13 to reinstate her mortgage. The mortgage was “non-escrowed” and Debtor was required to pay property taxes directly. Surprisingly, she did not pay her property taxes. The first time, the Lender paid the property taxes but decided not to pursue...
Members
February 28, 2021
By Joseph A. Bledsoe, III (“Jody”), Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Eastern District of North Carolina (New Bern) In the aftermath of City of Chicago v. Fulton, discussions abound as to whether it is sufficient for a chapter 13 debtor to seek return of his vehicle, repossessed prepetition, via a motion for turnover. Most seem to believe a motion...
Members
Academy Circle Logo Final
January 16, 2022
There is no special language/verbiage. Keep is simple. Stick to one issue per NOE. Pertinent loan/debtor information – “name, rank, and serial number” Called bank twice. Tried to get borrower reviewed for FHA Recovery Mod. Both times I was essentially told that the loan was “too many months delinquent” to be reviewed for FHA Recovery Mod. I was also told...
supremecourtnew
June 9, 2024
Reversing the Fourth Circuit, SCOTUS rules insurer is Party in Interest. Although an 11 there are possible implications in the context of Chapter 13.
July 28, 2019
Tiffany M. Cornejo was appointed as the Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the District of New Mexico on December 1, 2017. She took the reins from retiring Kelley Skehen. Ms. Cornejo received her Bachelor of Science in Journalism (B.S.J.) degree at the University of Kansas in Lawrence in 2002 and remained there to obtain her Juris Doctor in 2005. She...

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: