Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-07-06063/USCOURTS-ca8-07-06063-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
David D. Coop
Appellant
Anne B. Lasowski
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 07-6063

 

In re: *

*

Anne B. Lasowski, *

*

Debtor. *

*

David D. Coop, * Appeal from the United States

* Bankruptcy Court for the

Trustee - Appellant, * Eastern District of Arkansas

*

v. *

*

Anne B. Lasowski, *

*

Debtor - Appellee. *

 

Submitted: February 27, 2008

Filed: March 31, 2008

 

Before SCHERMER, FEDERMAN, and MCDONALD, Bankruptcy Judges

SCHERMER, Bankruptcy Judge

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
2

ISSUE

A Chapter 13 debtor may repay loans from qualified retirement plans during the

course of the Chapter 13 proceeding. The issue on appeal is how the amounts

required to repay such loans are calculated.

FACTS

Chapter 13 Debtor Anne B. Lasowski (“Debtor”) has monthly income of

$3,820.05 and monthly expenses of $3,467.66, resulting in net monthly income of

$352.39. Projected over sixty months, the Debtor will have $21,143.40 excess income

during the life of her plan. From this figure we must deduct amounts required to repay

the Debtor’s 401(k) loans in order to calculate the amount she is required to pay to her

unsecured creditors through the plan. The amount which must be paid to unsecured

creditors is otherwise known as her “disposable income.”

As of the petition date, the Debtor owed six monthly payments of $50 pursuant

to one 401(k) loan, for a total amount due of $300, and thirteen monthly payments of

$100 pursuant to another 401(k) loan, for a total amount due of $1,300. The question

we must decide is what number is deducted from the Debtor’s $21,143.40 excess

income figure to determine disposable income.

David D. Coop, Chapter 13 Trustee (“Trustee”), believes the correct number is

the $1,600 total balance due under the two loans. Under the Trustee’s analysis, the

Debtor must pay her unsecured creditors $19,543.40 ($21,143.40 minus $1,600) under

her plan. 

The Debtor believes the correct number is $9,000 which she calculates as the

combined monthly payments of $150 multiplied by the sixty months of the plan.

Under the Debtor’s analysis, she is only required to pay unsecured creditors

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
1

 The statutory language of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1) follows:

If the trustee or the holder of an allowed unsecured claim objects to the

confirmation of the plan, then the court may not approve the plan unless, as

3

$12,143.40 ($21,143.40 minus $9,000) and she is entitled to keep the extra $7,400.00

($19,543.40 minus $12,143.40) which she will earn over the sixty-month plan period.

The bankruptcy court agreed with the Debtor’s calculations and confirmed her

plan, in essence allowing the Debtor to keep the extra $7,400.00 she will earn over the

life of her plan. We agree with the Trustee’s position and conclude that the Debtor

may only deduct the actual amounts necessary to repay her 401(k) loans when

calculating disposable income. Once the loans are repaid the Debtor must redirect

the funds used to repay the loans to unsecured creditors. She may not keep them. 

Accordingly, we reverse. 

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The facts are not in dispute. The bankruptcy court’s statutory construction is

a conclusion of law which we review de novo. Colsen v. United States (In re Colsen),

446 F.3d 836, 839 (8th Cir. 2006); Coop v. Frederickson (In re Frederickson), 375

B.R. 829, 830 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2007). 

DISCUSSION

I. Disposable Income Under Section 1325

Section 1325 of the Bankruptcy Code sets forth the conditions for

confirmation of a Chapter 13 plan. 11 U.S.C. § 1325. The condition at issue here

is the requirement that the Debtor pay all projected disposable income received

during the life of the plan to her unsecured creditors. 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(B).1

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
of the effective date of the plan–

(A) the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on

account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim; or

(B) the plan provides that all of the debtor’s projected disposable

income to be received in the applicable commitment period

beginning on the date that the first payment is due under the plan will

be applied to make payments to unsecured creditors under the plan. 

The bold language highlights changes enacted pursuant to the Bankruptcy Abuse

Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”). 

2

 Current monthly income is defined as the average monthly income

received by the debtor during the six full months preceding the bankruptcy petition

date. 11 U.S.C. § 101(10A). 

3

 The relevant expenses are the amounts reasonably necessary to be

expended (i) for the maintenance or support of the debtor or a dependent of the

debtor or for a domestic support obligation that first becomes payable after the date

the petition is filed; and (ii) for charitable contributions (subject to a maximum). 

11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(2)(A). 

4

 Such a debtor is referred to as an above-median income debtor.

4

Disposable income is defined in the Bankruptcy Code as current monthly income2

less certain reasonably necessary expenses.3 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(2). Reasonably

necessary expenses differ between debtors who earn more than the median income

for a household of the same size as the debtor’s in the debtor’s state of residence4

and for debtors who earn the median or less than the median income for a

household of the same size as the debtor’s in the debtor’s state of residence. The

Debtor is an above-median income debtor. As such her reasonably necessary

expenses are calculated by reference to Section 707(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code. 

11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(3).

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 4 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
5

 The Section 707(b) formula does not mention the repayment of loans from

qualified retirement plans. Consequently, such loans are not considered when

calculating a presumption of abuse in the Chapter 7 context. In re Mowris,

2008 WL 732171 (Bankr. W.D. Mo.); In re Mordis, 2007 WL 2962903, at *5

(Bankr. E.D. Mo.); In re Whitaker, 2007 WL 2156397, at *5 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio.);

In re Lenton, 358 B.R. 651, 660 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2006); In re Barraza, 346 B.R.

724, 733 n.5 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2006). Accordingly, Official Form 22A, the

Chapter 7 Statement of Current Monthly Income and Means-Test Calculation does

not include a place to deduct repayments to loans from qualified retirement plans. 

5

II. The Section 707(b) Formula for Calculating Reasonably

Necessary Expenses of Above-Median Income Debtors

Section 707(b) of the Bankruptcy Code authorizes the court to dismiss the

Chapter 7 case of an individual debtor whose debts are primarily consumer debts if

the court determines that granting relief under Chapter 7 would be an abuse of the

provisions of Chapter 7. 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(1). Prior to the enactment of

BAPCPA, courts had discretion to determine if relief under Chapter 7 would be a

substantial abuse. BAPCPA removed the “substantial” qualifier and created a

formula under which abuse is presumed to exist. 11 U.S.C. § 707(b). The formula

uses the debtor’s current monthly income as a starting point. From current

monthly income the formula provides for the deduction of monthly expense

amounts specified in the Internal Revenue Service’s National Standards and Local

Standards and the debtor’s actual monthly expenses for categories of expenses

specified as Other Necessary Expenses by the Internal Revenue Service; payments

due on secured debts during the sixty months following the petition date; and

payment of all priority claims. 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(2)(A). The formula directs that

income and expenses be calculated on a monthly basis and then multiplied by sixty

to determine if the presumption of abuse arises. Id. The parties agree on the

application of the Section 707(b) formula in the Debtor’s case. However, the

Section 707(b) formula alone does not completely determine a Chapter 13 debtor’s

disposable income for purposes of plan confirmation.5

 The amount necessary to

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 5 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
6

 Subsection (f) of Section 1322 states as follows:

A plan may not materially alter the terms of a loan described in section

362(b)(19) and any amounts required to repay such loan shall not constitute

“disposable income” under section 1325.

11 U.S.C. § 1322(f). Section 362(b)(19) of the Bankruptcy Code excludes from

the operation of the automatic stay the withholding of income from a debtor’s

wages and the collection of amounts withheld under the debtor’s agreement

authorizing such withholding and collection for the benefit of certain employer

sponsored pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus, or other plans authorized under

certain sections of the Internal Revenue Code (referred to as qualified plans) to the

extent the amounts withheld are used solely for payments relating to a loan from

such qualified plan. 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(19).

In contrast to Official Form 22A used in Chapter 7 cases, Official Form 22C,

the Chapter 13 Statement of Current Monthly Income and Calculation of

Commitment Period and Disposable Income, includes a provision for qualified

retirement deductions in line 55.

6

repay 401(k) loans must also be taken into consideration when calculating

disposable income in the Chapter 13 plan confirmation context because

Section 1322 of the Bankruptcy Code expressly excludes amounts required to

repay a loan from a qualified retirement plan from disposable income in the

Chapter 13 context. 11 U.S.C. § 1322(f).6

III. The Exclusion of 401(k) Loan Repayment Amounts Under

Section 1322(f) 

The language of Section 1322(f) is clear: “any amounts required to repay [a

401(k)] loan shall not constitute ‘disposable income’ under Section 1325.” 

11 U.S.C. § 1322(f) (emphasis added). Only amounts required to repay the

Debtor’s 401(k) loan are excluded from disposable income. Only $1,600 is

required to repay the Debtor’s 401(k) loans. Therefore, only $1,600 is to be

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 6 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
7

excluded from the Debtor’s $21,143.40 excess income figure to determine her

projected disposable income of $19,543.40. This amount – $19,543.40 – is the

amount which the Debtor must pay her unsecured creditors through her plan in

accordance with Section 1325(b)(1)(B).

IV. Official Form 22C

Every Chapter 13 debtor is required to complete Official Form 22C, the

Chapter 13 Statement of Current Monthly Income and Calculation of Commitment

Period and Disposable Income. This form provides the basis of the calculation of a

Chapter 13 debtor’s disposable income. The form is divided into seven sections. 

In Part I, the debtor must report income. In Part II, the applicable commitment

period is calculated. In Part III, the determination is made as to whether or not the

debtor is an above-median income debtor. In Part IV, the Section 707(b) formula

calculations are made for above-median income debtors. In Part V, disposable

income is determined by deducting support income, qualified retirement

deductions, means test deductions, and special circumstance deductions from

income. Part VI provides for additional expense claims not found elsewhere on the

form. Part VII requires the debtor’s declaration under penalty of perjury that the

information contained in the form is true and correct. 

The exclusion from income for payments to loans from qualified retirement

plans is included on line 55 in Part V of Form 22C. The instructions for line 55 for

qualified retirement deductions direct the debtor to enter the “monthly average” of

“all contributions or wage deductions made to qualified retirement plans, as

specified in Section 541(b)(7)” and “all repayments of loans from retirement plans,

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 7 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
7

 The instructions for line 55 of Form 22C have been changed to now require

the debtor to enter the “monthly total of (a) all amounts withheld by your employer

from wages as contributions for qualified retirement plans, as specified in §

541(b)(7) and (b) all required repayments of loans from retirement plans, as

specified in § 326(b)(19).” See B22C (Official Form 22C) (Chapter 13) (01/08). 

The new language does not change the result reached herein because it is the

statutory language of Section 1322(f) and not the instructions on a form which

dictates this result. In re Arnold, 376 B.R. 652, 653 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 2007);

In re Graham, 363 B.R. 844, 850 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2007). Furthermore, both

versions of Form 22C are consistent with the statute.

8

as specified in Section 362(b)(19).”7 This latter item is the subject of the present

dispute. 

The Debtor argues that the term “average” on line 55 of Form 22C implies

that the loan repayment amounts should be calculated on a historical basis in the

same manner current monthly income is calculated under the Section 707(b)

formula. According to the Debtor, the Section 707(b) formula expressly provides

for debts which are intended to be pro-rated over the life of the plan to be

calculated by determining the total amount to be paid during the plan divided by

sixty. See, e.g. 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(2)(A)(iii)(secured debts) and (iv)(priority

debts). The Debtor argues that the Bankruptcy Code contains no such language

with respect to qualified retirement plan loan repayments and therefore they should

not be calculated in the same way as secured and priority debts.

We disagree. In the first place, the statute controls this determination, not an

official form. In re Arnold, 376 B.R. at 653; In re Graham, 363 B.R. at 850. The

statute is clear that the Debtor may only exclude amounts required to repay a loan

from a qualified retirement plan from disposable income in the Chapter 13 context. 

11 U.S.C. § 1322(f). Thus the Debtor’s deduction is limited to the actual loan

repayment amount, not the current monthly payment multiplied by the life of the

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 8 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
9

plan. To the extent the Debtor attempts to interpret Form 22C inconsistently with

the statute, her interpretation is incorrect.

Moreover, the Debtor’s focus on the language of the Section 707(b) formula

is misguided. The Section 707(b) formula does not control the exclusion of 401(k)

loan repayments from disposable income in the Chapter 13 context and therefore

its application has no bearing on line 55 of Form 22C. Rather Section 1322(f)

governs 401(k) loan repayments in the Chapter 13 context and limits the exclusion

to amounts required to repay 401(k) loans. Consistent with this principle, Form

22C distinguishes between expenses authorized under the Section 707(b) formula

and those governed by other sections of the Bankruptcy Code by separating them

into different sections of the form. Accordingly, deductions allowed under the

Section 707(b) formula are set forth in Part IV of the form while the calculation of

401(k) loan repayment amounts is included in Part V.

Line 55 of Form 22C directs the Debtor to calculate the average amount

required to repay her 401(k) loan. Since the Debtor owes $1,600 on the 401(k)

loans, the Debtor is entitled to a monthly deduction of $26.66 on line 55. This

amount is calculated by dividing the $1,600 loan balance by the sixty-month

duration of the plan. This result follows regardless of the size of the payment the

Debtor is making toward the loan on the bankruptcy petition date because only

amounts required to repay 401(k) loans are excluded from disposable income.

V. The Section 1322(f) Prohibition Against Material Alteration to the

Repayment Terms of a 401(k) Loan Does Not Impact the

Calculation of Disposable Income

The Debtor argues that calculating her 401(k) loan balances on a monthly

basis violates Section 1322(f) of the Bankruptcy Code which, in addition to

excluding loan repayment amounts from disposable income in the Chapter 13

context, also prohibits any material alteration to the repayment terms of a qualified

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 9 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
10

retirement plan loan. We disagree. The calculation embodied in Part V of

Form 22C, which includes line 55, is the determination of the Debtor’s disposable

income under Section 1325(b)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code for the purposes of

confirmation of a contested Chapter 13 plan. This calculation determines the total

amount the Debtor is required to pay her unsecured creditors through her plan. 

This calculation does not control how or when payments are to be made to

unsecured creditors under the plan.

Section 1322 of the Bankruptcy Code sets forth what a plan must do, what a

plan may do, and what a plan may not do. One of the things a plan may not do is

materially alter the repayment of a 401(k) loan. 11 U.S.C. § 1322(f). If the Debtor

is obligated to repay her 401(k) loans at the rates of $100 per month and $50 per

month respectively, she may continue to do so post-petition. Indeed, automatic

deductions from the Debtor’s paychecks for repayment of these loans continue

post-petition uninterrupted by the bankruptcy filing and unaffected by the

automatic stay. 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(19). Therefore, the Debtor will fully repay one

401(k) loan in the sixth month of her plan. Accordingly, she will have $50

additional income in the seventh month of her plan which she should add to her

plan payment at that time and thereafter. Likewise, she will fully repay her second

401(k) loan in the thirteenth month of the plan and will have $100 additional

monthly income to add to her plan payment in the fourteenth month of the plan and

thereafter.

If the Debtor elects to propose a plan in accord with this opinion, payments

to unsecured creditors will likely be back-loaded, either with no distributions until

later in the term of the plan or with distributions to unsecured creditors increasing

after satisfaction of the 401(k) loans. This result is consistent with the statutory

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 10 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
8

 For example, a plan must account for a change in circumstances that will

assuredly occur and will significantly alter the amount of the debtor’s disposable

income. In re Nowlin, 366 B.R. 670, 674-75 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2007), aff’d 2007

WL 4623043 (S.D. Tex.). An increase in the debtor’s monthly plan payment is

one way to accomplish this. In re Novak, 379 B.R. 908, 911 (Bankr. D. Neb.

2007). 

11

scheme governing Chapter 13 which permits a plan in which payments are

stepped-up during the life of the plan.8

 Such plans are common.

VI. Applicable Case Law

Courts are divided on this issue. However, our analysis of this issue is

supported not only by the plain language of the statute, but by the majority of

courts which have interpreted this language. Our conclusion is also consistent with

the purpose of BAPCPA’s amendments to Sections 707(b) and 1325(b): to require

above–median income debtors to make more funds available to unsecured

creditors. Babin v. Wilson (In re Wilson), 2008 WL 681102, at *3 (B.A.P.

8th Cir.).

When faced with the identical issue, courts in Nebraska and Texas reached

the same result we reach. The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of

Nebraska noted that a 401(k) loan repayment

is not the type of deduction from income that is governed by the

mechanical calculations of §§ 1325(b)(3) and 707(b)(2). Instead

§ 1322(f) stands on its own and is quite clear. . . . Prorating the loan

payment amount over the applicable commitment period is the only

way to ensure that the amount required to repay the loan (and only the

amount required to repay the loan) will be excluded from the

disposable income calculation. 

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 11 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
12

In re Novak, 379 B.R. at 911. The court held that prorating or averaging the 401(k)

loan repayment over the 60-month term of the plan for purpose of calculating

disposable income did not impermissibly modify the terms of the loan as

prohibited by Section 1322(f). The court noted that 

the means test calculation is simply that – a calculation. Its purpose is

to determine the amount of the debtor’s projected disposable income

that must be returned to unsecured creditors over the life of the plan. 

It does not, by itself, establish the debtor’s plan payment nor the order

in which claims will be paid.

Id. The court acknowledged that the plan payment may be “stepped up” once the

401(k) loan is paid in full and that such a plan would not modify the loan yet

would ensure the proper return to unsecured creditors. Id. 

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas

reached the same result and noted that requiring a debtor to increase plan payments

after paying off a 401(k) loan serves both the Congressional intent to protect

retirement contributions and to ensure that debtors repay creditors the maximum

they can afford, a primary goal of BAPCPA. In re Nowlin, 366 B.R. at 675, citing

In re Lenton, 358 B.R. at 660, which in turn cited H.R. Rep. 109-31, pt. 1 at 1, as

reprinted in 2005 U.S.C.C.A.N. 88, 89 (2005). The United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas recently affirmed the Nowlin decision, simply

noting that “[w]hen an allowed deduction for her current consumption no longer

exists, the amount that had been applied to that expense shifts to pay the people she

owes.” In re Nowlin, 2007 WL 4623043, at *1. This statement applies equally to

this Debtor.

Those courts which have reached a different result have confused the

Section 707(b) formula with the provisions of Section 1322 which exclude from

disposable income amounts necessary to repay 401(k) loans and prohibit material

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 12 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
13

alterations to a 401(k) loan. The confusion arises when the 401(k) loan repayment

amount is expressed as a monthly figure for the length of the plan. This is done in

Form 22C presumably to be consistent with the figures for income and Section

707(b) expenses which are calculated on a monthly basis. The form could have

instead calculated the debtor’s net income on a monthly basis (income minus

Section 707(b) expenses), multiplied that figure by the number of months in the

plan to calculate total net income during the life of the plan, and then subtracted the

amount required to repay 401(k) loans from the total net income figure to calculate

disposable income – the sum of money which must be paid to unsecured creditors

under the plan. This is the approach we used when we identified the issue at the

beginning of this opinion. 

Additionally, courts that have reached the opposite result have confused the

calculation of disposable income required to be paid under a plan with the terms of

the plan itself. For example, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern

District of Illinois required current 401(k) loan repayment amounts to be deducted

from the calculation of disposable income over the life of the plan rather than the

actual balance of the loan on the basis that so doing would materially alter the loan

repayment terms in violation of Section 1322(f). In re Wiggs, 2006 WL 2246432,

at *3 (Bankr. N.D. Ill.). We have explained above why we disagree with this

conclusion. The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New

Hampshire which reached the same result acknowledged the rights of the trustee

and the unsecured creditors to seek modification of the plan to increase plan

payments once the debtor’s 401(k) loan is repaid. In re Haley, 354 B.R. 340, 344

(Bankr. D. N.H. 2006). Our approach eliminates the need for later modification by

ensuring that all available disposable income is committed to unsecured creditors

in the original plan.

Finally, many courts which have addressed the issue of whether 401(k) loan

repayments are deductible under the Section 707(b) formula in the Chapter 7

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 13 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331
9

 See also In re Frederickson, 375 B.R. at 829 (Federman, J., dissenting), a

decision addressing the applicable commitment period for a Chapter 13 plan,

wherein the dissent acknowledged that repayment of loans from certain pension

and profit sharing plans would not continue throughout the entire Chapter 13 case.

14

context have acknowledged that in a Chapter 13 plan a debtor would be required to

redirect funds used to repay 401(k) loans to unsecured creditors once such loans

have been repaid. In re Mordis, 2007 WL 2962903, at *5; In re Whitaker, 2007

WL 2156397, at *5; In re Lenton, 358 B.R. at 660; In re Barraza, 346 B.R. at 733

n.5.9

 This is the mandate of Section 1322(f). 

CONCLUSION

Section 1325 of the Bankruptcy Code requires the Debtor to deliver all

disposable income during the life of the plan to her unsecured creditors. Pursuant

to Section 1322(f) only amounts required to repay 401(k) loans are excluded from

disposable income. Therefore, for purposes of calculating disposable income in

the plan confirmation context, only the actual balance required to repay the

Debtor’s 401(k) loan is excluded from disposable income. The Debtor is not

allowed to continue to deduct payments on account of 401(k) loans after the loans

have been repaid. Instead the Debtor must redirect the funds used to repay the

loans to unsecured creditors once the loans are repaid. The opinion of the

Bankruptcy Court confirming the Debtor’s plan is REVERSED. 

 

Appellate Case: 07-6063 Page: 14 Date Filed: 03/31/2008 Entry ID: 3418331