ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Bankruptcy Blogs -> Credit Slips

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Bankruptcy

: Credit Slips

Seventh Circuit Decides Hotly Debated Means Test Issue

By Tara Twomey

ADVERTISEMENTS
One of the more divisive post-BAPCPA consumer issues has been whether a debtor who has no monthly vehicle loan or lease expense can claim a vehicle ownership deduction when applying the means test. Until Wednesday, no circuit court of appeals had considered the issue. The four bankruptcy appellate panels that had rendered opinions were evenly split, as were the bankruptcy courts. Now the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has weighed in on the issue in emIn Ross-Tousey v. Neary/em, 2008 WL 5234070 (7supth/sup Cir. Dec. 17, 2008). The court reversed the district court and held that when conducting a means test analysis a debtor may claim a vehicle ownership expense even if the vehicle is not encumbered by a debt or lease payment. According to the court of appeals, this result was dictated by the plain language of the statute, the legislative history, and the underlying policies of the means test./p The importance of the decision extends beyond the car ownership allowance./p The court rejected the methodology used in the Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) as an interpretive guide for the means test. While the IRM is useful to IRS agents determining a taxpayer?s ability to pay, the court found no indication the Congress intended the IRM to be used in conducting the means test. The substantial discretion of IRS agents under the IRM was also found to be inconsistent with the purpose of the means test to adopt a uniform, bright-line test that eliminates judicial discretion. This means that other expenses provided for in the National and Local Standards, such as housing expenses, should be used as allowances and not as caps on expenses (at least in the Seventh Circuit)./p And, while the court noted that the UST can still request dismissal under section 707(b)(3) for bad faith or based on the totality of the circumstances, the burden of proof will be on the party seeking dismissal./p For those less interested in consumer bankruptcy, the court also addressed finality and appellate jurisdiction issues.

Full post as published by Credit Slips on December 18, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0031 secs (from cache 10/31/26 07:03:11)