why can't he further object look this is not clear at all and i object to it because it can be misconstrued in such way that would be detrimental to the state i can to make an exception beyond the face of the exemption did in this case right exactly we did love john on every ground that not only was the schedule i'm ambiguous on its face we couldn't determine whether or not each one of the claimed exemptions had exceeded the statutory allowance when someone files top to thirteen under section five forty one all of the debt of property becomes property of the estate we use chapter five for exemptions but we have to apply to different amount that's exactly what we did ok and so you did and what happened in the bankruptcy course offerings differently and the bankruptcy court interpreted the new schedule c with the checkbox exceed the statutory limit which does not make sense when you read all of the exemptions schedules together exemptions do not operate in a vacuum we've got to be able to read the deal one which is limited for the house and the homestead get put some the trustee to try to figure out their mouth said to be in plain he said but what i mean what are we are arguing about the news agency is against the intents and purposes of chapter thirteen on both grounds days i understand then within thirty days i suppose the the residents are the property becomes the property of the better and not of the a state five thousand dollars interest in the house then twenty two thousand dollars is the amount of pay residentially such as a right yes they get to keep so  advisory committee when it formulated this schedule about chapter thirteen was that it was not addressed at all by the committee there was a lot of discussion and the issues that this would create in chapter thirteen which is why this the second portion of that check box was added to some degree to try and alleviate the concerns of the chapter thirteen trustees which hollered at the creation of this new check box our position is that the advisory committee still got it wrong they did not go far enough because we still can't do we have a chapter thirteen to see still can't do the exemption math we can't read them all together i remind the court that every exemption in the federal scheme has an aggregate limit so i've got to be able to determine whether or not any that are exceeds on their child skis on their cars on their household their j y whether or not it hits a certain limit and by adding that second caviar up to the statutory limit it makes the asset appear as if it's in a vacuum and not read together with the rest of schedule c unfortunately bankruptcy is all about numbers you you have on everywhere from eligibility to the budget to the applicable come in period to the plan payment amount in chapter thirteen we we can't go writing out the numbers in schedule c where it's an one of the most important parts of the chapter thirteen process and say that we create a check box that if we fall without all the way your honour's then why don't we just appears with the check box is a bad form it's inappropriate ok but again i have i have a trouble grappling what the legal issue is before the checkbox they will tell you it says you can find out there were interpret the case not the statute so and that's just one step too far not interpreting what the rule of the law as the code which is very plain to make out and that question is made better claiming federal exemptions under section five twenty two of the bankruptcy code every example one hundred percent interest in an asset that's the question we've been certified to us to answer right and doesn't swa makes the scope of the exemption clear it's a for instance your honor that is not the mandate in a schwab was about notice and what it would take to have triggered a required objection by the chapter thirteen trustee those are two sentences and schwab it is been interpreted as a for instance by the way for example you might could try this to trigger an objection but it does not in any way say this is ok this is how you do it step one steps you two step three and if you read schwab all together the rest of it is replete with statements about limited interest exemptions and how you cannot convert them to in kind exemptions and this issue came has come up with all of the courts before right after schwab several of the doctors tried exempting things was one hundred percent from market value and across the country every court no you can't do that what the data relies on today is the fact that there has been a new part of that check box that was added to say up to the statutory limit but the code didn't change the rules that we have to function under have stayed the same if it wasn't ok right after this one it's not ok still with this new checkbox i have been in this court before and when i was here before i was talking to your honor's about mortgages and how important they are and bankruptcy and how they're paramount exciter etc etc and i was corrected by the honorable judge haynes who said she appreciated my thoughts on mortgages but in this court code is king that is what i'd like to remind your honour's the code specifically says you don't get to do the starter and we are asking that the bankruptcy court be reverse of the debtors be ordered to amend  schedule so you know something that compiles with the statutory language of which would be required to fix the values on their schedule c to declare a state of value for their exemptions for each side ok what if they if they said  claim one hundred percent of the fair market market value up to twenty two thousand dollars a set but i don't need to know what's fair market value is fair market value is not defined anywhere in the code it is your it's the difference  see that the debtors get to exempt depending on how much if any values are left for them to use under d five so if you claim the full value under did one then there is nothing for d five but de will have necessarily made claims in all of the statutory availability so i can't read those separately together to just say they're all at the map because they would fit the aggregate limit so what you are suggesting here is that lexington place where they claim as an exemption lexington place and they say the value of it is the current value of the portion that you belong anywhere else if they are the ones that are claiming the exemption but again just tell us the end of what is the that's what you want yeah i'm out of the exemption you're claiming with respect to this particular piece of property because there whether the exempted assets were drawn from the case ok now why should you put as she says i mean everything is in chapter thirteen everything is in monetary amounts now why shouldn't you be able to say exactly how much actually is the trustee and not having to object to the exemptions as their personal unobjectionable but i know you're not trying to do the trustee any favors what is what is the benefit for you the benefit is that the debtor is electing an interest that is up to the statutory cap in the event that there are fair market fluctuations or interest fluctuation or what is the statutory cap the statutory cap depends on what the particular asset is if the debtors vehicle which has a statutory imitation of and i don't have the numbers off the top of my head delicious the three thousand dollars the practical effect of you one percent for market value election is that in the event that the debtor were to claim a vehicle her interest in the vehicle that exceeds the statutory limit the trustee would not have to object to the exemptions she's per se limited by the statutory limit of three thousand dollars for example that would lead  seven thousand dollar not exam question of the of the assets correct and what the trustee then should do is object to confirmation not object to the exemptions as there are an objection per se with the trustee then should do is did you claim the specific amount of the exemption like on election complaints here did you say when you say one hundred percent a fair market value up to any applicable statutory authorized by the new revised forms and the supreme court's decision and the right thing which authorizes an interest in the property not just the specific monetary value to the judge just go into full fair market value interest in the asset is particularly important because the supreme court just sort of said hey you're taking a limited interest exemption with a cap that means you can only take a dollar interest versus a specific interest in the property or did did promulgated this new form to make it easier for a debtor to take a recent for market value interest on the issues with debtors before trying to claim hundred percent of the market interest is that it was never easy for a debtor to do so understand i'm asking you what you understand her argument to be i'm sure and you disagree with i understand i've also from the beginning i've never quite understood the trustees argument as to the objection to the exemptions from the very beginning it seems that the trustee has disputed the notion or disputed legality of the one percent for market value interest in general and the number i understand the are the trustees argument to mean that the debtor can only ever exempt a limited interest in the form of dollars and must always put down a value and i believe that everything has been resolved already which is there is opinion stating that the debtor must itemize the must decide in numerical value as the debtors interest in the itemized the value dressed specifically the objection to this form that the trustee asserted yes i believe so your honor that's what and going to one point i'd like to point out that based on the debtor addressing the trustees objection by i don't mind seeing the numerical value as the interest by assigning a dollar value to the debtors interest specifically i don't believe that there is actually a controversy in question as the tru didn't objection record on the kill forty five stating that there were no values assigned to the debtors one hundred percent from a previously interest right but yet the debtor then followed the supplemental schedule c which now includes you sign it and numerical value as to that interest which is the exemption amount of record on appeal forty seven however the trustee did not ever amend the objection further and at the hearing on confirmation the judge judges  interest is per se unobjectionable and does not require the trustee to object within the thirty days from the meeting of creditors i believe that the true issue of this case that the trustee takes is more of a valuation issue as to whether the do so and request appraisals from the debtor regarding the valuation of the property and ultimately at the end of the day it is the doctor's ultimate burden that confirmation to prove that all the elements of confirmation on that including that the best interest test was satisfied meeting that the exemption interests were within the statutory caps where the specific dollar amount is provided as you have indicated was done that was not done on the form that was done elsewhere it was done on the supplemental form on the suffering form yes on a supplemental format of record on appeal forty seven judgment and earlier you spoke of the significance of any appreciation in the valley the property so when that when that value is listed on the farm and the property appreciates then does that amount change no the amount does not change your honor because once exemptions are allowed that interest is withdrawn from the estate however percent for market value interest in a vehicle where the statutory cap is three thousand and the debtor assigns an interest of ten thousand dollars for example that's a seven thousand dollar nonexempt portion of the debtor must pay the best interest s to the creditors right but there if that is that car were to appreciate then the debtor would would essentially retain the appreciation in the vehicle upon the sale however there is also a very realistic possibility that that vehicle may depreciate in the in the debtor must sell that property right just because the car just because the debtor was entitle to retain the statutory cap of three thousand originally if he now sells the car for a thousand dollars that's two thousand dollars loss that he eats up on top of having to have already paid seven thousand dollars to general unsecured creditors because values determined on the date of filing i said i'm out of time you're out of time your hono and then distinguish those cases by saying those will be for the former it is a trust his position and the correct position is that the form did not create you long the code is the code and the code remains the same before the storm and after this form so that is it ever ok or specific provision of the comb is the form by allowing it allows the debtors to not fix a value of the you can't even get there give me a section of the code that gets filed it takes limited interest exemption which is the one two three four five six seven eight five twenty two and it all the tests you need to do is look at three columns the description of the property the law which the daughter is claiming to use for their exemption on the value that third one is missing on everywhere where the doctor checks a box instead of giving  places on the code i mean i look at this in the schedule we don't know what the legal ramifications are of that and we argue the judges who was incorrect in telling the doctor why don't you just go and add some extra language and use it as  violates the provisions of the statute that separate in time from limited entries and if it doesn't then you lose what we're doing just like slobs have to do ok if somebody finds one hundred percent of the market value