In re Richall, 470 B.R. 245, 249–50 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2012) (Deasy)

Disposable income test in § 1325(b) is satisfied by debtors with CMI greater than applicable median family income when plan pays unsecured creditors in full in less than five years using less than all projected disposable income. Schedules I and J showed monthly net income of $886.42. Form B22C showed monthly disposable income of $1,756.21. Plan proposed to pay unsecured claims in full with monthly payments of $855 over 60 months. “After the enactment of BAPCPA, the Bankruptcy Code differentiated the minimum and maximum term for a chapter 13 plan, based on the amount of a debtor’s disposable income. . . . In the case of above median debtors, § 1322(d)(1) now proscribes that ‘the plan may not provide for payment over a period that is longer than 5 years.’ . . . In effect, BAPCPA eliminated any minimum term of a plan for above median debtors. All above median debtors are now subject to a uniform term of five years for a chapter 13 plan with only one exception: the term of the plan, or the commitment period, may be less than five years if creditors are paid in full. 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(A) and (b)(4). However, BAPCPA did not change the minimum or maximum plan term for below median debtors not paying creditors in full. It remains a minimum of three years, absent cause for a longer term, which cannot exceed five years, unless creditors can be paid in full in a shorter period of time. 11 U.S.C. §§ 1322(d)(2) and 1325(b)(1)(B) . . . . Consequently, after BAPCPA, courts may deny confirmation of a chapter 13 plan proposed by a below median debtor, which stretches beyond a three year period and pays creditors in full but does not commit all disposable income, because a court could find that no cause exists to extend the plan longer than three years when a debtor can pay[ ]off creditors within the commitment period. See 11 U.S.C. § 1322(d)(2)(C). After BAPCPA, the same is not true for above median debtors. . . . Section 1325(b)(1) requires compliance with subsection (A) or (B), but not both. . . . [A]bove median debtors now have an election to either pay all of their disposable income for five years, or until creditors are paid in full, § 1325(b)(1)(B), or to pay less than their disposable income over five years, if such lower payments will pay unsecured creditors in full. 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(A). The Debtors’ Plan provides for payment of all unsecured claims in full during a five year term through payments of approximately one-half of their disposable income. Thus, the Debtors’ Plan complies with § 1325(b)(1)(A). While the Debtors could pay off their unsecured creditors in a shorter period of time if they contributed all of their monthly disposable income to plan payments, they are not required to do so under the plain unambiguous language of the Bankruptcy Code. . . . [T]his result is contrary to the intent of Congress in enacting BAPCPA. . . . [I]t is the responsibility of Congress, not the courts, to correct the statute.”

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

January 19, 2020
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee (Nashville) Chapter 7 debtor may successfully discharge student loan obligations by satisfying the basic holding of Brunner v. N.Y. State Higher Education Servs. Corp. rather than satisfying the judicial gloss added by subsequent decisions. Rosenberg v. N.Y. State Higher Education Servs. Corp., 2020 WL 130302...
Members
May 2, 2021
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee (Nashville) In calculating an above-median income debtor’s projected disposable income, the court may deduct from the debtor’s current monthly income only the expenses as listed in the IRS manual and not the debtor’s actual expenses. (Taylor) In re Rodriguez, 520 B.R. 94 (B.A.P. 9th Cir....
Members
January 31, 2021
By Herbert L. Beskin, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Western District of Virginia (Charlottesville) In a recent case out of the Sixth Circuit, the Appeals Court heard an appeal by the Chapter 13 Trustee concerning direct payments by the debtor on a car loan and the applicable interest rate. The case is In re Chambers, 6th Circuit, # 20-1376, Appeal...
Members
Hale-Andrew-Antico
September 25, 2022
Sahni v. Tajima (In re Tajima) 2022 WL 3354006 (9th Cir. BAP Aug 15, 2022)(unpublished) S.Klein J ISSUE Did the Bankruptcy Court err when confirming Chapter 13 plan? RULING Yes. FACTS This case involves the tension of litigation in bankruptcy causing delay, and the need to get a Chapter 13 plan confirmed quickly. Here, there was a dispute between debtors...
Members
December 15, 2019
By Veronica D. Brown-Moseley and Stephen F. Relyea1 The automatic stay serves as a shield that immediately protects debtors in bankruptcy and their property from a host of creditor collection actions ranging from foreclosure, repossession, and garnishment to collection letters and phone calls. In most instances, the filing of a bankruptcy case forces creditors to cease all collection actions and...
Members
February 17, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART II: More Supreme Court Action on Arbitration Introduction Click here for Part I Click here for Part III Click here for Part IV What is the effect of an . . . It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members....
Members
November 1, 2020
Lloyd T. Kraus was appointed as a Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Eastern District of Texas on August 1, 2019. While Kraus loves his job, he would much rather still be serving as a staff attorney to his best friend and mentor John Talton. Talton was tragically killed in a traffic accident in October of 2018. Kraus received his...
Members
April 18, 2021
Bankruptcy Courts Grapple with the “COVID-19 Discharge” APPENDIX A 11 U.S.C. § 1328 Discharge (Text added by CAA, effective: December 27, 2020 and subject to one-year sunset, appears in italics.) (Mandatory and precatory directions to the court, critical to the statutory analysis in In re Ritter, appears in bold.) (a) Subject to subsection (d), as soon as practicable after completion...
Members
hayes
April 7, 2024
When the debtor fails to properly schedule a creditor in an asset case, is the now non-dischargeable debt under § 523(a)(3) limited to the amount the creditor would have received had it filed a proof of claim?
Members
June 27, 2021
By Academy Staff Phil was a quiet, humble man. He loved his family, loved the law, and loved to serve others. Philip D. Lamos, age 53 of Painesville Township, passed away suddenly on June 11, 2021. He was a hometown boy who loved his family, especially his son Matthew and daughter Emily. Phil was a graduate of John Carroll University...

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: