Posts

The Benefits of a “Short Tax Year Election” in an Asset Chapter 7 Case

Your Chapter 7 trustee can use your unneeded assets to pay current-year income taxes if you split the calendar tax year into two: the pre-bankruptcy and post-bankruptcy “short years.”

I’m closing this series on taxes and bankruptcy with three blogs on some relatively sophisticated topics. The tools I discuss do not apply to most cases. But when they do, they can save you a lot of amount of money, and better meet your goals. This first one is a good example.

Let’s first set the scene. If you have substantial income tax liabilities, especially if they are spread over a number of years, Chapter 13 is often the best tool for dealing with them. But a Chapter 13 takes three to five years. Sometimes a Chapter 7 case accomplishes enough so that it’s the better option. If your taxes are old enough and you meet a series of conditions (see my last blog about this), a Chapter 7 case could discharge (legally write off) most or all of your tax debts. But even if Chapter 7 would leave you with a significant nondischargeable tax debt, it might still make more sense as long as you could anticipate a reliable and manageable arrangement for satisfying that one last debt outside of bankruptcy. Getting in and out of bankruptcy in a matter of months instead of up to five years may be worth a lot to you.

The short year election could help just enough to make Chapter 7 a feasible option, and therefore the preferred option. That’s  because it can enable more of your nondischargeable taxes to be paid by the Chapter 7 trustee, leaving you owing less taxes at the completion of your bankruptcy case.

As I said in the first sentence of this blog, the short year election allows you to split your tax year into two tax portions, each of which is treated as its own tax year. The first “short year” covers from January 1 of that year to the day immediately before the filing of your Chapter 7 case, and the other “short year” is the rest of the year—from the date of filing your case until December 31.  

How can this possibly help? Two ways.

1. It allows any taxes you may owe for the short year before filing the Chapter 7 case to be a “priority” debt in your case, so that it can be paid from assets collected by the Chapter 7 trustee. This turns debt that would have been treated as incurred after the filing of the case, and thus wholly your obligation, into one that may be paid in whole or in part by the trustee. This can reduce or eliminate the current year tax debt, leaving you with either less or none to pay after your bankruptcy case is over.

2. It allows you to apply any loss carry forwards or credit carry forwards from the prior tax year to the income earned during that same pre-bankruptcy short year. The loss carry forwards reduce the tax for that short year, thus reducing any your potential tax debt owed after your case is finished. The credit carry forwards increase the tax for that short year, but that gives the trustee the opportunity to pay it if there are estate assets with which to do so. Each in their own way can increase the possibility that you will have less or no taxes to pay after your case is over.

The context that this works best in is a closed business or some other situation where the debtors have non-exempt assets that they do not mind surrendering to the trustee in return for a discharge of most of or all of the debts. Imagine a spouse who had been trying to run a business, and then had to close it down. The other spouse has a relatively high salary or other income but stopped paying withholdings or quarterly estimated taxes at the beginning of the year because of the lack of income from the other spouse closing down the business. By three-fourths of the way through the year, a substantial amount of tax liability could accrue. They may not be able to simply wait until after the end of the year because of pressure from creditors. The short year election allows the tax debt accrued through three-fourths of the year to be potentially paid by the trustee by liquidating the no longer needed business assets. The trustee may also have funds from other sources, such as preferential payments from a creditor or two.

So, through the benefit of the short year election, in the right circumstances the trustee could pay thousands of dollars of your nondischargeable tax debt by liquidating assets that you no longer need, instead of having this same money just going to your other creditors. And to the extent that the trustee would be getting some of that money through forced reimbursement of creditor’s preference payments, some of your taxes would be indirectly paid by those creditors. Not often that you can get somebody else to pay your taxes.

As I said at the beginning, the short year election is a tool which applies only limited cases, but when it does it can be extremely helpful.

 

NOTE: This election is available ONLY in asset Chapter 7 cases–not Chapter 13s or no-asset Chapter 7s.

/by

Writing Off Income Taxes Forever through Bankruptcy

What income taxes can a Chapter 7 bankruptcy completely write off?

My last blog ended saying how Chapter 13 lets you pay off certain income taxes much more conveniently because you’re protected from the tax collector and can usually avoid paying substantial amounts of interest and penalties. But that’s for taxes you can’t write off. What exactly does it take to write off a tax completely?

It takes meeting four main conditions.

But before I list and describe these, I have to emphasize that this whole area—dealing with tax debts in bankruptcy—is a very complex one. I present the information in these blogs to you because the more you know the better. But part of being informed is knowing when you definitely need an attorney’s help. So, part of my job is to make very clear when you are in a particularly difficult area, when you truly need the help of someone who spends his or her professional life thoroughly understanding the complex rules, and constantly applying them in the real world. This is clearly one of those areas.

And now on to those four main conditions for writing off income taxes.  

1. Have three years passed since the tax return was due?

This one is pretty straightforward, because every income tax debt has a due date for the filing of its tax return. The important twist here: if you requested an extension of time—usually from April 15 to October 15—the three-year period does not begin until the extended due date.  

2. Have two years passed since the applicable tax return was actually filed?

It does not matter how ancient the tax if at least two years have not passed since the return was in fact filed. And a “substitute for return”—the common procedure in which the IRS in effect prepares a tax return on your behalf based on the (usually incomplete) information it has available—that doesn’t count as a filed return for this purpose.  

3. Have 240 days passed since assessment of the tax?

In most situations an income tax is assessed within a few weeks after you file it. Assessment is the tax authority’s formal determination of your tax liability, usually through its review and acceptance of your tax return. But sometimes the amount of tax is in dispute because of a tax audit or litigation about the amount. By the time the accurate tax amount is finally assessed, the above three-year or two-year time periods may have passed, but that tax cannot be written off unless that bankruptcy case is filed more than 240 days after the assessment. This 240-day period is also put on hold while a taxpayer’s “offer in compromise” is pending. Just like it sounds, that’s an offer to the IRS to settle the tax for less money or for specific payment terms.

4. Have you filed a fraudulent tax return or intentionally attempted to evade the tax?

Even if all the required time periods have passed, if you were dishonest on your tax return—such as not including some of your income or claiming invalid deductions–or tried to avoid paying a tax in some other way, that tax will not be written off in bankruptcy.

This discussion should give you a good idea whether any or all of your income tax debts can be written off in a bankruptcy. And in some cases applying these four conditions will give you the accurate answer. But there are some other considerations that can come into play. What if the IRS recorded a tax lien against your home and on your personal possessions?  How would a prior bankruptcy affect these timing rules? What about your appeal of a tax? What’s considered an honest mistake on a tax return instead of an intentional tax evasion? When can the taxing authority add a 30-day “tack-on” to the 240-day rule?

Bankruptcy can certainly write off income taxes under the right circumstances, but you need to have an experienced attorney review your personal situation to see if you truly meet those circumstances.

/by

Three Big Ways Bankruptcy Helps with Income Taxes

Bankruptcy CAN 1) legally write off some income taxes; 2) stop IRS wage garnishments, bank account levies, and tax liens; and 3) enable a faster payoff of the taxes you must pay, by avoiding most ongoing interest and penalties.

In the last two blogs I explained what happens to tax refunds in Chapter 7 and 13. But what if instead you owe income taxes? The treatment of tax debts in bankruptcy is a complicated subject, but here today I’m covering the most basic and important powers of bankruptcy over taxes.

1) The ability to “discharge” (write-off) income taxes:

I’m not going into the detailed rules here, but let me clear up any possible confusion: income taxes can be discharged if they meet some very specific conditions. Among those conditions:

  • the age of the particular tax
  • whether and when the tax return was filed
  • whether there was any effort to enter into an “offer in compromise”
  • whether there is evidence of tax evasion

Generally the older the tax, the more likely it will be discharged, although some of the conditions are not time-based.  If you owe more than one year of income taxes, then each year of tax debt is analyzed separately. In fact portions of each tax year’s debt—tax, interest, and penalties—are treated differently in many situations. To be clear, taxes can be discharged under either Chapter 7 or Chapter 13. So determining which of these two options is better requires carefully comparing how each treats your tax debts, as well as all your other debts.

2) The “automatic stay” applies to the IRS, and to the state and local taxing authorities:

Changes in the law tend to cause confusion, to get blown out of proportion. The last major overhaul of the bankruptcy laws by Congress in 2005 allowed the IRS and other tax agencies to do certain very limited things in spite of the taxpayer having filed a bankruptcy. These limited exceptions to the automatic stay include:

  • conducting (or continuing) a tax audit (but not taking any action outside the bankruptcy court to collect the tax resulting from the audit)
  • issuing a notice of deficiency
  • assessing the taxes
  • issuing a “notice and demand” (although again without taking any collection action)

Otherwise, just like all other creditors, the IRS and its state and local cousins cannot pursue collection of any liabilities while your bankruptcy case is pending, except in the unusual event that the bankruptcy court gives special permission to do so.

3. As for taxes that cannot be discharged, Chapter 13 usually provides a way to avoid most ongoing interest and penalties, reducing the total amount of taxes to pay:

Back taxes often take a long time to pay off because interest and penalties keep accruing while you are making the payments. Especially if your payments are relatively small, the additional interest and penalties can greatly increase the total you end up paying. But in a Chapter 13 case, the penalties stop accruing as soon as soon as your case is filed. Even the earlier penalties are treated like normal debt and so are often paid little or not at all. And interest does not get added unless that tax debt is covered by a recorded tax lien.  In combination these benefits can save lots of money. This lack or reduction in accruing interest and penalties also allows you to pay other important debts before paying the taxes—such as vehicles or home mortgage arrears. This allows you to better protect those valuable possessions by paying their debts faster.

/by

Income Tax Refunds in a Chapter 13 Case

Chapter 13 gives you more flexibility about what you can do with your current income tax refund. But unlike Chapter 7 which doesn’t care about your future years’ refunds, Chapter 13 does.

As I said in my last blog, if you file a Chapter 7 bankruptcy after the beginning of the year, at a time when you’re still due a tax refund on the year that just passed, your trustee is going to be very interested in that refund. It’s your money that the government is simply holding for you until you claim it.  That’s true even if you haven’t yet filed your tax return, or don’t even know the amount of the refund. Whatever the amount, it’s still your money—you just haven’t yet claimed it or calculated the amount by filing the tax return. So unless that refund fits within an exemption, or is small enough to not be worth the trustee’s bother, the trustee is going to get that refund.

Chapter 13 comes with some good news and some bad news on tax refunds.

The good news comes from Chapter 13’s flexibility when it comes to assets that are not exempt. In a Chapter 7 case, non-exempt assets simply go to the trustee to be distributed to creditors according to a very rigid formula.  In Chapter 13, in contrast, you may be able to use that refund in two very beneficial ways.

First, you may be able to get permission to use the refund, or a part of it, for a necessary, one-time expense. A standard example is a critical vehicle repair, needed to be able to commute to work. The expense usually needs to be an extraordinary one, over and beyond what would be included in your standard monthly budget.

Second, to the extent that you are required to pay the refund over to the trustee, in a Chapter 13 case you usually have somewhat greater control over where that money will go. Your attorney might be able to explicitly earmark, through a specific provision in your Chapter 13 plan, where the trustee pay some or all of that refund. More likely, in certain cases, with careful wording of your plan, your attorney may be able to nudge that money in a particular direction that may be more favorable to you. For example, a vehicle that you need to keep could be paid off faster than otherwise, thus taking away from that creditor any grounds for objecting.    

Now the not-so-good news. One positive aspect of Chapter 7 is that it’s fixated on what assets you have a right to as of the moment your case is filed.  But Chapter 13 is by its very nature also interested in your future income during the three to five years that you are expecting to be in the case. And for most purposes future tax refunds are considered future income. So your Chapter 13 plan has to account for the tax refunds that you would be receiving during the years that you are in the case. In most cases that means that you must turn over your tax refunds to the trustee to be paid out according to the terms of your plan.

The truth is that this is not necessarily bad:

  • If you usually get large tax refunds, your withholdings should likely be adjusted so that you can put that money to use during the year for your regular living expenses. This is especially helpful if your budget is tight. Doing so would reduce the size of the refunds going to the trustee, minimizing this problem.
  • In some situations, a year or two into a case you may be able to get permission to use that year’s tax refund for a new special expense, such as ,again, for a new vehicle repair.
  •  Even if the refunds do just go to the trustee during the course of your case, sometimes that extra money flowing into your Chapter 13 plan finishes your case faster, in other cases it may result in important creditors being paid more quickly, and finally sometimes the refunds may enable you to pay off the plan within the mandatory maximum deadline.
/by

Taxes in a Closed-Business Bankruptcy Case

Dealing with taxes from a failed business through a bankruptcy—that sounds complicated. But I’m going to keep it simple here. What are your basic options if you owe taxes after closing down a small business?

You have two choices (once it’s clear that you need to file a bankruptcy because of the amount of your debts):

1. File a Chapter 7 case to discharge (legally write-off) all the debt that you can, perhaps including some of the taxes, and then deal directly with the taxing authorities about the remaining taxes.

2. File a Chapter 13 case to discharge all the debt that you can, perhaps including some of the taxes, and then pay the remaining taxes through that same Chapter 13 case.

In real life, especially after a messy situation like the shutting down of a business, many factors usually come into play in deciding whether a Chapter 7 or 13 is better for you. But focusing here only on the taxes, it comes down to this core question: Would the amount of tax that you would still owe after completing a Chapter 7 case be small enough so that you would reliably be able to make reasonable arrangements with the Internal Revenue Service (or other applicable taxing authority) to satisfy that obligation within the following two years or so?

Chapter 13 protects you from the collection powers of the taxing authorities during the usual three to five years while you are fulfilling your obligations under the case.  You should be in a Chapter 7 case only if you don’t need that protection. That means your attorney needs to be able to tell you 1) what tax debts will not be discharged in a Chapter 7 case, and 2) what payment or other arrangements will you likely be able to make to take care of those remaining taxes.  

How reliably anyone can predict how a particular taxing authority will respond about a surviving tax debt depends on the circumstances. For example, the IRS has some rather straightforward policies about how long a taxpayer has to pay off income tax obligations below a certain amount. In contrast, predicting whether or not the IRS will accept a certain “offer-in-compromise” can be much more difficult to predict.  If you cannot get rather strong assurances that you will be able to reasonably handle what the taxing authorities will require, you may well be better off within the protections of Chapter 13.

Not only does Chapter 13 give you protection from the tax authorities, you would likely be permitted to pay less to them per month towards the not-discharged taxes. That’s because your living expense budget in a Chapter 13 case will likely be more reasonable than when you’re dealing directly with the IRS after a Chapter 7 case. Furthermore, unlike the after-Chapter 7 situation, penalties would not continue to accrue, and in most cases neither would interest. As a result, in a Chapter 13 case most likely you would pay less money to finish off the tax debt.

Again, the bottom line: once you know how much tax debt will survive a Chapter 7 case, do you have a reasonable and reliable means of paying it off or settling it within about two years? If so, do the Chapter 7 case. Otherwise, take advantage of the greater protection and likely more reasonable budgeting in Chapter 13.  

/by

The Far Limits of the Means Test

Very few people who want to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy need to take the means test all the way to its limit. But if you do, you better have some iron-clad “special circumstances” to defeat your “presumption of abuse.”

The means test triggers whether or not your case is presumed to be an abuse of Chapter 7. Each step of the means test gives you a way to avoid this presumption of abuse. So, you avoid the presumption IF ANY of the following apply to you:

1. your income is no more than the median family income for your state and your size of family;

2. your income is more than the applicable median family income, but, after subtracting a list of allowable expenses, your remaining monthly disposable income is less than $117 per month; or

3. your income is more that the applicable median family income, your remaining monthly disposable income is between $117 and $197 per month, AND when you multiply your specific monthly disposable income amount by 60, this total is less than 25% of your “non-priority unsecured debts” (debts not secured by collateral, excluding special “priority debts”—certain taxes, support payments, etc.).

(See my last few blogs about these earlier parts of the means test.)

A large percentage of people who want to file Chapter 7 avoid the presumption of abuse on the first step—having sufficiently low income. Many others do so because their monthly disposable income is low enough at the second step, or their monthly disposable income is low enough in comparison to the amount of their debt.

BUT, if after all this you still have a presumption of abuse, your case will either be dismissed (thrown out) or else changed into a Chapter 13 case (requiring payments to your creditors). Your last chance to avoid this is if you can show “special circumstances.” The Bankruptcy Code lays out this law as follows:

[T]he presumption of abuse may only be rebutted by demonstrating special circumstances, such as a serious medical condition or a call or order to active duty in the Armed Forces, to the extent such special circumstances… justify additional expenses or adjustments of current monthly income for which there is no reasonable alternative.

So when pushed to the limit, a test that is supposed to be an objective way to decide who qualifies to file a Chapter 7 bankruptcy comes down to a very subjective question about whether any “special circumstances” apply.

To be fair, much of the means test IS objective, in the sense that it involves a whole lot of number-crunching to see if you can escape that dreaded “presumption of abuse.” But when a lot of those numbers—such as the allowed expense amounts, or the above-mentioned $117 and $195 amounts—appear arbitrary or do not accurately reflect your honest reality, then that “objectivity” has gotten away from the purpose for which it was supposedly intended.

Regardless, if you want to file a Chapter 7 case and, after going through all the steps of the means test, you are among that small minority of people still with a presumption of abuse, how likely are you going to be saved by the remaining subjective step in the process? Will you be able to persuade the judge that your “special circumstances” defeat the presumption of abuse?

This is a prime example of when you want a very experienced and conscientious bankruptcy attorney at your side. Why? Because the ambiguousness of the law, as you saw in the excerpt above, means that your attorney will need to 1) know how the local bankruptcy judges are interpreting this law, 2) carefully apply that to the details of your case when advising you about your options before filing your case, and then 3) if necessary be persuasive in making your case for “special circumstances” in court.  

/by

The Arbitrariness of the “Objective” Means Test

The means test is supposed to be an objective way to decide who qualifies to file a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. So what’s so objective about whether your “monthly disposable income” is less than $117 or more than $195? Sounds pretty arbitrary to me.

Before getting to this step of the means test, let me bring you back to its beginning.  I can’t emphasize enough that many, many people qualify for Chapter 7 strictly based on their income.  As I explained a few blogs ago, if your income is no more than the published median income for your state and family size, you skip the rest of the means test. You’re presumed to qualify for Chapter 7.

So if and only if your income is more than the median, you take the next step of the means test—deducting expenses from your monthly income. These allowed expenses are based on a terribly complicated set of rules I discussed in my last blog. After deducting these expenses, that leaves you with your “monthly disposable income,” a very important amount.

This brings us to those $117 and $195 “monthly disposable income” amounts mentioned above. And here’s where the “objective” rules get quite arbitrary. Catch this:

1) IF your “monthly disposable income” is $117 or less, then you are presumed not to be abusing the system to be filing a Chapter 7 case. In other words, you’ve passed the means test.

2) IF your “monthly disposable income” is more than $195, then you are presumed to be abusing the system to be filing under Chapter 7.

3) IF your “monthly disposable income” is between $117 and $195, then whether or not you are presumed to be abusing the system depends on one more step. You ARE presumed to be IF you multiply that specific “monthly disposable income” by 60, and the resulting amount is enough to pay at least 25% of your “non-priority unsecured debts.” (Priority debts are a category of special debts like certain taxes, support arrearage, and such.) If that resulting amount pays less than 25% of that set of debts, then you are presumed not to be abusing the system to be filing under Chapter 7.

So where do those critical two numbers—come from? Notice they amount to a difference of only $78 per month between being presumed to be able to file a Chapter 7 case and being presumed not to be able to.

Well, let’s take it a step further. Multiply the monthly amounts of $117 and $195 both by 60 months (the length of a maximum-length Chapter 13 case) and you get close to $7,025 and $11,725, respectively. (These used to be $6,000 and $10,000 when the law passed in 2005, and has been adjusted for inflation. The current amounts are good until April 1, 2013.) The effect of this set of rules is that:

1) if you theoretically CAN’T pay at least $7,025 to your “non-priority unsecured creditors” within 5 years of monthly payments (60 months), than it’s OK for you to be in a Chapter 7 case and write off those creditors;

2) if you theoretically CAN pay $11,725 or more to those creditors within 5 years, than it’s NOT OK for you to be in a Chapter 7 case, and instead you should be in a Chapter 13 case paying your disposable income to those creditors; and

3) if you theoretically can pay somewhere in between those two amounts in 5 years, then whether you should be in a one Chapter or the other turns on whether or not the total to be paid to the creditors would amount to at least 25% of the “non-priority unsecured debts.”

So where do these decisive $117/$195 and $7,025/$11,725 amounts come from? As far as I can tell, they are totally arbitrary.  Some creditor lobbyist or Congressional staff person likely just pulled a couple numbers out of his or her head. I can’t see any principled reason to pick those amounts to determine whether a person should or shouldn’t be allowed to file a Chapter 7 case.

Sensible or not (and the means test is anything but!), the law is the law: if your income is over the median then the amount of your monthly disposable income determines whether you are presumed to be abusing the bankruptcy system by filing a Chapter 7 case.

I will finish this series on the means test with one last blog. Because, even if you have too much disposable income resulting in a presumption of abuse, you might STILL be able to stay in Chapter 7 by defeating that presumption through “special circumstances.”

/by

The “Black Box” of the Means Test

What happens if you make too much money so that you are over “median income,” but you still want to file a Chapter 7 case?  You get to go through the “black box” that is the expenses side of the means test.

In the last couple of blogs I’ve covered the first part of the means test, the income part. That part says that if your income is no more than the medium amount for your state and your size of family, you can skip the rest of the means test and qualify for Chapter 7. But if your income is over the applicable median income amount, then you have to go through the convoluted expenses part of the means test to see whether you can still do a Chapter 7 case.

As much as I want in these blogs to help you understand how bankruptcy works, there is a limit to what can be effectively conveyed within the limitations of a blog. Much of the expenses part of the means test goes over that limit. So in this blog we will avoid that nitty-gritty. But here’s what you should know.

The concept behind the means test is pretty straightforward: debtors who have the means to pay a meaningful amount to their creditors over a reasonable period of time should be required to do so. But putting that concept into law resulted in maddeningly complicated and unclear rules. Not surprisingly, trying to apply those rules to real life has been challenging.

The expense rules got really complicated by trying to be objective. Congress assumed that it couldn’t trust debtors to list their anticipated expenses because they’d just show they had no money left over for their creditors. For a more objective standard, Congress could have picked between either the actual expenses a debtor in fact pays for food, clothing, etc., or else used some standard amount for expenses.

Well, Congress chose…  BOTH—a mix between actual and standard expenses. So now for some expenses we must use standard amounts, based on Internal Revenue Service tables. But this gets complicated quickly because some of those expense standards are national, some vary by state, and some even vary among specific metropolitan areas within a state. Then some other “necessary” expenses can be the actual amounts expected to be spent. And there are even some expenses which are partly standard and partly actual (certain components of transportation expenses). Add in deductions for secured debt payments (vehicle, mortgage) and priority debts (income taxes, accrued child support), and trying to figure out when they can and can’t be claimed, and you get an idea why I’m not going to get any deeper into this “black box.”

I WILL tell you in my next blog what happens at the other end of this “black box” of expenses—what happens if you have some disposable income after deducting expenses.

I’ll close today by emphasizing that the expense rules are not clear how they are to be applied to many common situations. The result is that different courts have interpreted these rules in inconsistent ways, requiring the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve these disputes one at a time.

So this is a prime example of why you want to have an attorney who fully understands these often confounding rules, and is also on top of the pertinent local and national court interpretations of these rules. There’s a lot riding on it—whether or not you qualify for Chapter 7, and how much and how long you have to pay into a Chapter 13 case. In other words, what’s potentially at stake is years of your life, and thousands, if not tens of thousands, of dollars.

/by

Keeping Everything You Own Through Chapter 13 Bankruptcy

One good reason that people filing Chapter 7 don’t lose any of their stuff to the bankruptcy trustee—if they did have something to lose, they  likely file a Chapter 13 instead. How does Chapter 13 protect what you’d otherwise lose in a Chapter 7 “straight bankruptcy”?

As I said at the beginning of my last blog, protecting assets that are collateral on a loan—like your home or vehicle—is a whole different discussion than protecting what you own free and clear. Chapter 13 happens to be a tremendously powerful tool for dealing with secured creditors—especially with homes and vehicles. But that’s for later. Today I’m talking about using Chapter 13 as a way to hang onto possessions which are worth too much or have too much equity so they exceed the allowed exemption, or simply don’t fit within any available exemption.

Right off the bat you should know that if you have possessions which are not exempt, you may have some choices besides Chapter 13. You could just go ahead and file a Chapter 7 case and surrender the non-exempt asset to the trustee. This may be a sensible choice if that asset is something you don’t really need.  There are also some asset protection techniques—such as selling or encumbering those assets before filing the bankruptcy, or negotiating payment terms with the Chapter 7 trustee —which are delicate procedures well beyond what I can cover today.

But depending on your overall situation, if you have an asset or assets which you really need (or simply want to keep), you can file a Chapter 13 and keep that asset by paying for the privilege of not surrendering it.  You do that by paying to your creditors as much as they would have received if you would have surrendered that asset to a Chapter 7 trustee. But you have 3 to 5 years to do that, while you are under the protection of the bankruptcy court. Your Chapter 13 Plan is structured so that your obligation is spread out over this length of time, making it relatively easy and predictable to pay (in contrast to, for example, negotiating with a Chapter 7 trustee to pay to keep an asset).

Whether the asset(s) that you are protecting is worth the additional time and expense of a Chapter 13 case depends on the importance of that asset. Often people with assets to protect have other reasons to be in a Chapter 13 case, and the asset protection feature is just one more benefit. And believe it or not, depending on the amounts and nature of your assets and debts, you may be able to hang onto your non-exempt assets in a Chapter 13 case without paying anything more to your creditors. This tends to be more likely if you owe taxes or back support payments. One of the biggest advantages of Chapter 13 is that it can play your financial problems—like having too much assets and owing back taxes—against each other. So that you get an immediate solution—assets protected right away and the IRS off your back–and a long-term solution, too—assets protected always and IRS either written off or paid for, until you’re done and are free and clear.

/by

Keeping Everything You Own in Bankruptcy

You want to know: “Can I really keep everything I own if I file bankruptcy?”

A two-part answer:

1) Yes, you can, usually, keep those possessions that are all yours (you don’t owe any money on them).  

2) Yes, you can, usually, keep those particular possessions on which you are making payments to a creditor (like your home or vehicle), IF you want to keep it them, AND are willing and able to meet certain conditions. (Hint: those conditions are usually lots better in bankruptcy than without one.)

In today’s blog I’ll get into the first part of that answer. I’ll get to the second part later.

Most people who file bankruptcy can keep what they own for two reasons: 1) exemptions and 2) Chapter 13 protections. I’m covering exemptions today.

Make no mistake: at the heart of bankruptcy is the basic principle that your debts are discharged—legally written off forever—in return for you giving all your assets to your creditors. Except you can keep any of your assets which fit within an exemption. As the saying goes, this exception swallows the rule. Most of the time, all assets are exempt and so debtors get a Chapter 7 discharge without giving anything to the trustee.

Exemptions are simply a list of the types and amounts of assets that are protected from your creditors, and thus from the Chapter 7 trustee acting for those creditors. But exemptions are anything but simple.

First, the Bankruptcy Code contains its set of federal exemptions, and each state also has its own exemptions. If you file a bankruptcy in certain states, you have a choice between using the federal exemptions and the state ones, while in other states you can only use the state exemptions. In states where you have a choice, picking which of the two exemption schemes is better for you is often not at all obvious and you need an experienced attorney to advise you.

Second, if you have moved relatively recently from another state, you may have to use the exemption rules of your prior state. Because different state’s rules can differ wildly, thousands of dollars can be at stake depending on what day your bankruptcy is filed.

Third, once you know which set of exemptions apply to you, whether any of your particular assets is covered by an exemption, and thus protected from your creditors, is often not clear. The exemption statues were often written many decades ago, use archaic language, and have a whole history of court ruling to interpret what they include. Plus the local trustees often have unwritten rules about how they interpret the exemption categories in practice. So, determining whether an asset is exempt or not is often much, much more than checking down a list of exemptions. By way of example, if you and your spouse each have one vehicle that you use for getting to work, and a third one used by your 18-year-old to get back and forth to school, will your vehicle exemption cover all three vehicles? Under what circumstances?

So navigating through exemptions can be much more complicated than it looks, and is one of the most important services provided by a bankruptcy attorney.

The fact remains that among most people who do end up filing a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case, everything they own DOES fit within the exemptions. So the bankruptcy trustee takes nothing from them.

But what if you DO own one or more assets which do not fit any of the available exemptions? How can those still be protected through a Chapter 13 case?  I cover that in my next blog.

/by