FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT APR 18, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 13759

________________________ D . C . D o c k e tN o . 0 6 - 6 0 5 5 3 - C V - C MA BK CY N o . 0 3 - 2 7 9 7 6 - BK C- RB I n R e : P I C C A D I L L Y C A F E T E R I A S , I N C . D e b t o r .

__________________________________________________ S T A T E O F F L O R I D A D E P A R T M E N T O F R E V E N U E , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s P I C C A D I L L Y C A F E T E R I A S , I N C ., D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A p r i l 18, 2007)Honora ble David G. Trag er, United States District Judg e for the Easter

n District of New * York, sitting by

designation. 2 B ef ore B A R K E T T and K R A V IT C H C i rc ui tJudg es , and T R A G E R , D i stri ct * Judg e. P E R C U R I A M: T h e F lo rid a D ep ar tm en t o f R ev en u e ( “D O R ”) ap p ea ls th e d istrict co u rt’s af fi rm ance of the bank rupt cy court ’ s dec i si on grant i ng P i cc adi l l y C af et er i as ( “P ic c a d illy ” ) as ta m p - ta x e x e m p tio n p u r s u a n t to 1 1 U .S .C . § 1 1 4 6 ( c ) o n th e s a le of P i cc adi l l y’ s a ss et s. T he i ss ue pres ent ed i s w hether the §1 14 6(c) st am p-t ax e x e m p tio n m a y ap p ly to a s s e t tr a n s f e r s m a d e b e f

o r e a p la n o f

r e o r g a n iz a tio n is c onf i r m e d unde r11 U . S . C . § 1129. I . Ba c k g r o und O n O c to b e r2 8 , 2 0 0 3 , P ic c a d illy e x e c u te d a n a s s e t p u r c h a s e a g r e e m e n t w ith P i ccad i l l y A cq u i si t i o n C o rp o rat i o n (“ P A C ”) w h erei n P A C ag reed t o p u rch ase s u b s ta n tia lly a ll o f

P ic c a d illy ’s a s s e ts , c o n s is tin g m a in ly p r o p e r ty , f o r$ 5 4 m illio n . O n O c t obe r29, 2003, P i c c a di l l y f i l e d f orba nkrupt c y unde rC hapt e r11 of the B a n k ru p tc y C o d e . P ic c a d illy a ls o f ile d a m o tio n r e q u e s tin g a u th o r iz a tio n to s e ll s u b s ta n tia lly a ll o f

its a s s e ts o u ts id e o f

th e o r d in a ry c o u r s e o f

b u s in e s s p u r s u a n t to 11 U . S . C . § 3 63 (b)( 1). A s partof i t s § 36 3 m ot i on , P i cc adi l l y a l so re qu es t ed an e xe m pt i on f

r om s t a m p t a xe s on the a s s e ts a l e pur s ua ntt o 11 U . S . C . § 1146( c ) . T he3

D O R o b j ect ed t o b o th req u est s. A lth o u g h P ic c a d illy h a d a lr e a d y e x e c u te d a n a s s e t p u r c h a s e a g r e e m e n t w ith P A C , i tnone the l e s s r e que s t e d tha tthe ba nkrupt c y c our tc onduc ta n a uc t i on throu gh w hi ch the hi gh es tbi dd erw ou l d b e e nt i t l ed t o p urchas e i t s a ss et s. In an o rd er d at ed D ecem b er 4 , 2 0 0 3 , th e b an k ru p t cy co u rtap p ro v ed th e b i d d i n g p ro cess, s c he dul e d a n a uc t i on of P i c c a di l l y ’ s a s s e t s , e s t a bl i s he d bi d a nd s a l e pr oc e dur e s f or th e a u c tio n , a n d s c h e d u le d a h e a r in g to ap p r o v e th e u ltim a te s a le . T h e w in n in g b id o f $ 8 0 mi l l i o n w a s f

r o m Pi c c a d i l l y I n v e s tme n t s , LLC. O n January 26 , 20 04 , P i cc adi l l y, al on g w i th a com m i tt ee of se ni or se cure d no t e hol ders and a com m i tt ee of un se cure d cre di t ors e nt er ed i nt o a gl ob al se tt l em entagre em ent(“ G l ob al S ett l em ent ”) . T he G l ob al S ett l em entre sol ved, i nt er a lia , th e p r io r ity o f

d is tr ib u tio n a m o n g P ic c a d illy ’s c r e d ito r s a n d , a c c o r d in g to P ic c a d illy , w a s in m a n y w a y s “a n a lo g o u s to c o n f ir m a tio n o f

a p la n .” O n F e brua ry 13, 2004, the ba nkrupt c y c our tc onduc t e d a s a l e he a r i ng, appr ove d the s a l e of

P i c c a di l l y ’ s a s s e t s t o P i c c a di l l y I nve s tm e nt s , a nd he l d tha tthe sa l e w as exem ptfr om st am p t axes pu rs uantt o § 11 46 (c ). T he courtal so approv ed the G l ob al S ett l em ent . O n M ar ch 15 , 20 04 , the bank rupt cy courtent er ed an a m e nde d s a l e or de r . T he D O R the n f i l e d a m ot i on t o r e c ons i de r , va c a t e , a nd/ or a m e nd the s a l e or de r , w hi c h the c our tde ni e d. T he a s s e ts a l e c l os e d on M a r c h 16,4

2004. O n M a r c h 26, 2004, P i c c a di l l y f i l e d i t s i ni t i a l C hapt e r11 P l a n of L iq u id a tio n a n d la te rf

ile d a n “A m e n d e d P la n .” T h e D O R f ile d a n o b

je c tio n to c onf i r m a t i on of

the A m e nde d P l a n a nd c om m e nc e d the i ns t a nta dve r s a ry a c t i on by f i l i ng a c om pl a i nta ga i ns tP i c c a di l l y s e e ki ng a de c l a r a t i on tha ts t a m p t a xe s i n the am ou ntof $3 9, 20 0 w er e notexem ptun der § 11 46 (c ). O n O ct ob er21 , 20 04 , ov er the D O R ’ s obj e c t i on, the ba nkrupt c y c our tc onf i r m e d the A m e nde d P l a n ( the

“ C onf i r m a t i on O r de r ” ) . T he D O R f i l e d a m ot i on t o r e c ons i de rthe C onf i r m a t i on O rder , w hi ch the bank rupt cy courtdeni ed. T he D O R then fi l ed an am ended com pl ai nti n the adversa ry proceedi ng , and b oth P i cc adi l l y a nd the D O R fi l ed m o tio n s f

o rs u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. F o llo w in g a h e a r in g , th e b a n k ru p tc y c o u r t g r a n te d s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t in fa vo r of P i cc adi l l y, ho l di ng thatthe as se tsa l e w as exem ptfr om st am p t axes p u r s u a n t to § 1 1 4 6 ( c ) . T h e b a n k ru p tc y c o u r t r e a s o n e d th a t th e s a le o f s u b s ta n tia lly a l l of P i c c a di l l y ’ s a s s e t s w a s a tr a ns f e r“ unde r ” i t s c onf

i r m e d pl a n of r e o r g a n iz a tio n b e c a u s e th e s a le w a s n e c e s s a ry to c o n s u m m a te th e p la n . O n ap p e a l, th e d is tr ic t c o u r t a f

f ir m e d th e b a n k ru p tc y c o u r t’s g r a n t o f s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t to P i cc adi l l y. In i t s order , ho w ever , the di stri ctcourtem ph as i ze d thatthe part i es had n o t a d d r e s s e d th e is s u e o f w h e th e rth e § 1 1 4 6 ( c ) ta x e x e m p tio n ap p lie d to th e s a leIn April o f 2 00 5, § 1 14 6 w a s amend e d b y , inter alia , re -de signatingwh at w a s f or merly 1 subsection (c ) as subsec tion (a) (that is, what was § 1146( c) prior to 2005 is now § 1146(a)) . Ba nkruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, Pub. L . No. 109-8, § 7 1 9 (b ) ( 3 ) ( B ) , 1 1 9 S t at . 2 3 ( 2 0 0 5 ) ( am e n di n g1 1 U . S . C . § 1 1 4 6 ( 2 0 0 5 ) ) . F o r th es ak eo f

c l ari ty, 5 of P i cc ad i l l

y’s a s s e ts , r a the r , the pa r t i e s f oc us e d the i ra r gum e nt s on w he the rthe ex em p t i o n m ay ev erappl y t o a s s e ttr a ns f e r s c om pl e t e d b ef

o re a pl a n of re organi za t i on has bee n con fi rm ed by the bank rupt cy court(thati s, preconfi rm at i on tra nsfe rs ). T hu s, ac cordi ng t o the di stri ctcourt , the i ss ue of w hether th e § 1 1 4 6 ( c ) e x e m p tio n ap p lie d to th e s a le o f P ic c a d illy ’s a s s e ts w a s n o t p r o p e r ly b ef o re it . N ev er th eles s, th e d istrict co u rt ex p re ss ly af firm ed th e b an k ru p tcy c o u rt’s i m pl i ci tconcl usi on that§ 1 14 6(c) m ay appl y “ w here a tra nsfe r i s m ade preco n fi rm at i o n . ” T h e D O R ap p eal s. I I . D i s c u s s i on O n appe a l , the D O R a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d i n hol di ng tha tthe § 1 1 4 6 ( c ) s ta m p - ta x e x e m p tio n m a y ap p ly to p r e - c o n f ir m a tio n a s s e t s a le s . “[ T ]h is courtre vi ew s adi stri ctcourt ’ s ordergrant i ng sum m ary j ud gm entde no vo . ” I n re C l ub A s s oc s . , 951 F . 2d 1223, 1229 ( 11th C i r . 1992) . W e l i ke w i s e r e vi e w de novo qu es t i on s of l aw i nv ol vi ng the i nt erpret at i on and app l i ca t i on of the B ankrup t cy C ode , w he the rf

r om the ba nkrupt c y c our torthe di s tr i c tc our t . I n r e I nt ’ l A dm i n. S e r v s ., I n c ., 4 0 8 F .3 d 6 8 9 , 6 9 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . S ec t i on 11 46 (c ) of the B ankrup t cy C od e e xem pt s f rom st am p o r s i m i l ar 1ho wever, were fer to § 11 46 (c ) a s it e xiste d at th etim ethema jority of thee ventsre le va

nt to this caseoccur

red (that is, beforeApril of 2005). The version of § 1146(c ) in eff ect at the time of the proc eeding s in the bankruptcy court reads as follows: “Theissuance, transfer, or e x chang e of a security , or the makingor deliver y of an instrument of tra

nsfer under a plan conf

irmed under

section 1129 of this title, may not be taxed under any

law imposing a

stamp taxor similar tax.” 11 U.S.C. § 1146(c) (2000).

6 t a x e s a n y a s s e ttr a n s f

e r“ u n d e ra p l a n c o n f

i r me d u n d e r ” § 1 1 2 9 . 1 1 U . S. C. § 1 14 6(c) . T he di sput e i n thi s c as e turns up on w hether pre- confi rm at i on tra nsfe rs m a y c o n s titu te tr a n s f

e r s “u n d e ra p la n c o n f

ir m e d .” T hi s c our tha s y e tt o s qua r e l y a ddr e s s w he the rthe § 1146( c ) t a x e xe m pt i on m ay appl y t o p re -c on fi rm at i on tra nsfe rs . T he T hi rd and F ou rth C i rc ui t s, ho w ever , have address ed thi s i ss ue, and b oth h ave hel d thatthe § 1 14 6(c) t ax exem pt i on m ay not ap p l y t o su ch tran sfers. I n I n r e N V R , L P , the F our th C i r c ui the l d tha tthe pl a i n l a ngua ge of § 1146( c ) f

or e c l os e d appl i c a t i on of the t a x e xe m pt i on t o pr e - c onf i r m a t i on tra nsfe rs . 18 9 F . 3d 44 2, 45 6-58 (4th C i r. 19 99 ). A ft erdet erm i ni ng thatst andard di c t i ona r i e s de f

i ne “ unde r ” a s “ [ w ] i th the a uthor i z a t i on of , ” “ i nf e r i or , ” or

“ s ubor di na t e , ” the F our th C i r c ui ts t a t e d tha ti tc oul d not“ s a y tha ta tr a ns f e rm a de p ri o r t o th e d at e o f p l an co n fi rm at i o n co u l d b e su b o rd i n at e t o , o r au th o ri zed b y, som ethi ng thatdi d n otexi statthe dat e of tra nsfe r— a pl an confi rm ed by the court . ” Id . at4 5 7 . T h e N V R co u rtal so rel i ed o n th e i n t erp ret i v e can o n th atco u rt s m u st n a rr o w ly c o n s tru e e x e m p tio n s f r o m s ta te ta x a tio n in r e a c h in g its h o ld in g . I d .7

I n I n r e H e c h in g e rI n v e s tm e n t C o . o f D e la w a r e , I n c ., th e T h ir d C ir c u it c o n c lu d e d th a t “th e m o s t n a tu r a l r e a d in g o f th e p h r a s e ‘u n d e ra p la n c o n f ir m e d ’ in 11 U . S . C . § 1 14 6(c) i s ‘ autho ri ze d’ by such a pl an” a nd hel d thatthe § 1 14 6(c) e xe m pt i on doe s notappl y t o pr e - c onf i r m a t i on tr a ns f

e r s . 335 F . 3d 243, 252- 54 ( 3d C i r. 20 03 ). In so ho l di ng , the H ec hi ng erm aj ori ty det erm i ned t hatthe “ autho ri ze d b y” read i n g “ fi t s b estw i th th e rem ai n i n g l an g u ag e o f S ect i o n 1 1 4 6 (c)” an d al so

“ g i v es th e p h rase ‘ u n d er a p l an co n fi rm ed ’ th e sam e m ean i n g as an i d en t i cal p h rase in a n o th e rp r o v is io n o f

th e B a n k ru p tc y C o d e , 1 1 U .S .C . § 3 6 5 ( g ) .” I d . a t 2 5 3 - 5 4 . T h e c o u r t a ls o r e lie d o n tw o in te rp r e tiv e c a n o n s : “ta x e x e m p tio n p r o v is io n s a r e to b e s tr i c t l y c o n s tru e d ” a n d “ f e d e r a l l a w s th a ti n t e r f

e r e w i th a s t a t e ’ s t a x a t i o n s c h e me m us tbe na rr ow l y c ons true d i n f a vorof the s t a t e . ” I d. a t254. A l though, a s s t a t e d, thi s c our tha s ne ve ra ddr e s s e d the pr e c i s e i s s ue of w hether the § 1 14 6(c) exem pt i on appl i es t o p re - confi rm at i on tra nsfe rs , i n In re T . H . O r l a ndo L t d. , i ta ddr e s s e d a s om e w ha ts i m i l a ri s s ue of i nt e rpr e t a t i on r e ga r di ng § 1146( c ) . 391 F . 3d 1287, 1291 ( 11th C i r . 2004) . I n tha tc a s e , a s pa r tof a c onf i r m e d pl a n, a thi r d- pa r ty m or t ga ge l e nde ra gr e e d t o l e nd m one y t o the de bt or o n th e c o n d itio n th a t th e o w n e ro f th e p r o p e r ty a d

ja c e n t to th e d e b to r ’s p r o p e r ty w o u ld r e f

in a n c e its m o r tg a g e th r o u g h th e s a m e m o r tg a g e le n d e r . I d . a t 1 2 8 9 - 9 0 . T he i ss ue before thi s c ou rtw as w hether atra nsac t i on betw ee n tw o n on -debt ors ( aAlthough this cour t in T.H. Orlando e xplicitly agree d with the “interpretation[s] of 2 § 1146(c) ” ar

ticulated in Hechinger and NVR, this court’s conc lusion that the phrase “under a plan” refers to a tra

nsfer that is “nec essar

y to the consummation of a c onfirmed plan”does not squarewith the strict temporal interpretation ar ticulated in Hechinger and NVR. See T.H. Orlando, 391 F .3d at 1291. Moreover, this court neither expli citly

nor implicitly

approve d of the conclusion that § 1146(c ) may not ext end to pre -conf

irmation transfers. See id. 8 tra nsac t i on thatw as spec i fi ca l l y c on t em pl at ed by the confi rm ed pl an of r e o r g a n iz a tio n ) w a s e x e m p t f r o m s ta m p ta x e s u n d e r§ 1 1 4 6 ( c ) . I d . a t 1 2 9 0 - 9 1 . T he courtconcl ud ed that“ [a ] tra nsfe r ‘ un der apl an’ re fe rs t o a tra nsfe r autho ri ze d b y a c o n f

ir m e d C h ap te r1 1 p la n . I n tu rn , a p la n a u th o r iz e s a n y tr a n s f e rth a t is nece ss ary t o the consum m at i on of the pl an. ” I d. at12 91 . A cc ordi ng l y, thi s c ou rt hel d that“ the ph ra se ‘ un der apl an’ re fe rs t o a tra nsfe r thati s nec es sa ry t o the c o n s u m m a tio n o f

a c o n f ir m e d C h ap te r1 1 p la n .” I d . a t 1 2 9 2 . 2 T he S ec on d C i rc ui tal so addres se d an anal og ou s i ss ue i n In re Ja coby-B ender, Inc. , w here the qu es t i on pres ent ed w as w hether aprop erty tra nsfe r thatoccurre d p ost -c on fi rm at i on w as exem ptun der § 11 46 (c ) e ven t ho ug h the “ pl an d id n o t m e n tio n a n y in s tru m e n t o f tr a n s f e ra n d d id n o t g iv e th e d e b to rth e a u th o r ity to m a k e th e s p e c if

ic s a le .” 7 5 8 F .2 d 8 4 0 , 8 4 1 ( 2 d C ir . 1 9 8 5 ) . T h e S e c o n d C ir c u it o b s e r v e d th a t “C o n g r e s s ’s ap p a r e n t p u rp o s e in e n a c tin g s e c tio n 1 1 4 6 ( c ) w a s to fa ci l i t at e r eorgani za t i on s throu gh gi vi ng t ax re l i ef . ” I d. T he courtal so no t ed that § 1146( c ) w a s de r i ve d f r om § 267 of

C hapt e rX of

the ol d B a nkrupt c y A c t , a nd that§ 2 67 re l at ed t o tra nsac t i on s “ w hi ch se rve t o execut e or m ake e ff ec t i ve a pl anNo ta bly, at le a st twoba

nk ru ptcy c ourt s h avea dopte d th ere a so ningarticulate d in 3 J acoby-B ender

and conc luded that § 1146(c ) does a pply to pre-c onfirmation transf ers that a re “nec essar y to the consummation” of a confirme d plan. See In re Webster Classic Auctions, Inc., 318 B.R. 216, 218 (B ankr. M.D. F la. 2004) (holdingthat § 1146(c) applies to transfers that are s p e c i f i c al l y c o nt e mp l at e d

b y ane x i s t i n gp l ano f

re o rg an i z at i o nth ati s u l t i m at e l y c o n f i r m e d) ; In re B eulah Churc h of God In Christ J esus, Inc., 316 B .R. 41, 47-51 (B ankr. S.D.N.Y . 2004) (holdingthat transfers integral to the c onfirmation of a n exis ting plan a

re e x empt under § 1146(c) as transf

ers ne cessa

ry for the pla

n’s consummation). 9 c o n f ir m e d u n d e rC h ap te rX .” I d . a t 8 4 1 - 4 2 . T o th a t e n d , th e c o u r t h e ld th a t a s pe c i f i c s a l e ora s s e ttr a ns f

e rt a ke s pl a c e “ unde r ” a c onf i r m e d pl a n w i thi n the m e a n in g o f

§ 1 1 4 6 ( c ) w h e r e th e tr a n s f e r“is nece ss ary t o the consum m at i on of a pl a n. ” I d. a t842.

3 In o u r v i ew , th e b ett er reaso n ed ap p ro ach t o § 1 1 4 6 (c) i s fo u n d i n Jaco b yB e nde ra nd T . H . O r l a ndo, a s the be tt e rr e a di ng of “ unde ra pl a n c onf

i r m e d” l ooks nott o the t i m i ng of

the tr a ns f

e r s , butt o the ne c e s s i ty of the tr a ns f

e r s t o the consum m at i on of a c on fi rm ed pl an of re organi za t i on . S ee H ec hi ng er , 33 5 F . 3d at 2 6 1 ( N y g a a r d , J ., d is s e n tin g ) . F i rs t , the pl ai n l angu age of § 11 46 (c ) i s a m bi gu ou s, as the st atut e c an pl ausi bl y be r ea d ei ther a s des cr i bi ng el i gi bl e tra nsfe rs t o i ncl ud e tra nsfe rs “ un der a pl an confi rm ed” r egar dl es s of w hen th e p la n is c o n f ir m e d , or , as th e D O R arg u es, im p o s in g a te m p o r a l r e s tr ic tio n o n w h e n th e c o n f ir m a tio n o f

th e p la n m u s t o c c u r . S ec on d, w hen C on gres s w ant ed t o p l ac e at em po ra l re stri ct i on i n the B ankrup t cy C ode i tdi d s o e xpr e s s l y . S e e , e . g. , 11 U . S . C . § 1104( a ) ( “ A ta ny t i m e a f t e rtheIn B onner v . Ci ty of Pric ha rd , 6 61 F .2 d 1 20 6, 12 09 (1 1th Cir . 1 98 1) (en b anc ), thi s 4 court adopted as bindingprec edent all decisions handed down by the former F ifth Circuit before the close of

business on September 30, 1981. 10 c o mme n c e me n to f

th e c a s e b u tb e f

o r e c o n f i r ma t i o n o f

a p l a n . . . . ” ) ; 1 1 U . S. C. § 1 1 0 4 ( c ) ( “ [ T] h e n a ta n y t i me b e f o r e th e c o n f

i r ma t i o n o f

a p l a n . . . . ” ) ; 1 1 U . S. C. § 1105 ( “ A ta ny t i m e be f or e c onf i r m a t i on of

a pl a n . . . . ” ) ; 11 U . S . C . § 1114( e ) ( 2) (“ A ny paym entfor r et i re e benefi t s r equi re d t o b e m ade before a pl an confi rm ed un der [ § 1 12 9] i s e ff

ec t i ve . . . . ”) ; 11 U . S . C . § 1 12 7(b) (“ [A ] tany t i m e a ft er c onf i r m a t i on of

s uc h pl a n . . . . ” ) . “ W he r e C ongr e s s i nc l ude s pa r t i c ul a rl a ngua ge in o n e s e c tio n o f

a s ta tu te b u t o m its it in a n o th e rs e c tio n o f th e s a m e A c t, it is g e n e r a lly p r e s u m e d th a t C o n g r e s s a c ts in te n tio n a lly a n d p u rp o s e ly in th e d is p a r a te i nc l us i on ore xc l us i on. ” S hot z v. C i ty of P l a nt a t i on, F l a . , 344 F . 3d 1161, 1168 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 3 ) (ci t at i o n an d i n t ern al p u n ctu at i o n o m i tt ed ). N ex t , al th o u g h , as a general rul e, grant s of t ax exem pt i on s a re narr ow l y c on strued, i ti s e qu al l y true that

“ w e a re no tt o abrog at e the pu rpose of the exem pt i on throu gh t oo narr ow an ap p lic a tio n .” H e c h in g e r , 3 3 5 F .3 d a t 2 5 9 ( N y g a a r d , J ., d is s e n tin g ) . T h is is es peci al l y s o i n l i gh tof the pri nci pl e thata r em edi al st atut e s uch as the B ankrup t cy C od e s ho ul d b e l i bera l l y c on strued. M att erof C ri st , 63 2 F . 2d 12 26 , 12 32 (5th C i r. 1980) ( c ouns e l i ng “ l i be r a l c ons truc t i on of the B a nkrupt c y A c ti n l i ghtof the 4 purpos e of

the pr ovi s i on unde rc ons i de r a t i on” ) ; s e e a l s o B e c ht e l C ons tr . C o. v.11

S e c ’y o f L a b o r , 5 0 F .3 d 9 2 6 , 9 3 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 5 ) ( s ta tin g th a t “it is ap p r o p r ia te to gi ve broad con struct i on t o rem edi al st atut es ”) . F i nal l y, the stri ctt em po ra l c ons truc t i on of

§ 1146( c ) a r t i c ul a t e d by the T hi r d a nd F our th C i r c ui t s i gnor e s the prac t i ca l re al i t i es of C hapt er11 re organi za t i on ca se s, as even tra nsfe rs c ont e m pl a t e d i n a pl a n of r e or ga ni z a t i on w i l l notqua l i f y f orthe t a x e xe m pt i on un l es s they occ ur a

f t er the order confi rm i ng a pl an i s e nt er ed. B uti ti s j ustas pr oba bl e tha ta de bt orm a y ne e d t o c l os e a s a l e a s a c ondi t i on pr e c e de ntt o the p a r tie s ’ w illin g n e s s to p r o c e e d w ith c o n f ir m a tio n o f

a p la n a s it is f

o rth e p a r tie s to a g r e e o n th e te r m s o f

a p la n , o b ta in c o n f

ir m a tio n , a n d th e n d e te r m in e w h a t th e s a le w i l l br i ng. S e e I n r e B e ul a h C hur c h of G od I n C hr i s tJ e s us , I nc . , 316 B . R . 41, 50 (B ankr. S . D . N . Y . 20 04 ). F or these re as on s, w e dec l i ne t o fol l ow the stri ct te m p o r a l in te rp r e ta tio n a d o p te d b y th e T h ir d a n d F o u r th C ir c u its . I n s te a d , w e h o ld tha t§ 1146( c ) ’ s t a x e xe m pt i on m a y appl y t o th o se pre- confi rm at i on tra nsfe rs that ar e nec es sa ry t o the consum m at i on of a c on fi rm ed pl an of re organi za t i on , w hi ch, at the ve ry l e a s t , r e qui r e s tha tthe r e be s om e ne xus be tw e e n the pr e - c onf i r m a t i on tr a n s f e ra n d th e c o n f

ir m e d p la n . W e e m p h a s iz e th a t th e is s u e o f w h e th e rth e b a n k ru p tc y c o u r t p r o p e r ly appl i ed the § 1 14 6(c) t ax exem pt i on t o the as se tsa l e i n thi s c as e has no tbeenThe DO R’s argument that summary judgment was improper

could havebeen ba sed on 5 o n eo f tw o gro un d s—th atth e§ 1 1 4 6 ( c ) e x e mp t i o nm ay never apply to pre-c onfirmation transfers, or , even if

§ 1146(c) may

apply to pre-c onfirmation transf ers, it did not apply

to the specificpre- confirmation sale in thi s c as e . The DO R presents only the former argument before this court. 12 b r ie f e d b y th e p a r tie s a n d is n o t p r o p e r ly b e f o r e u s . H e n c e , w e d o n o t d e c id e th is

5 is s u e . S e e H a ll v . C o r a m H e a lth c a r e C o rp ., 1 5 7 F .3 d 1 2 8 6 , 1 2 9 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) . R a the r , the pa r t i e s ’ a r gum e nt s f oc us on w he the r , a s a ge ne r a l pr opos i t i on, the § 1146( c ) t a x e xe m pt i on m ay ap p l y t o p r e - c o n f i r m a t i o n tr a n s f

e r s . As s u c h , we l e a ve f ora nothe rda y a n a tt e m ptt o s e tf or th a f r a m e w or k f

orde t e r m i ni ng the ci rc um st ance s und erw hi ch § 1 14 6(c) ’ s t ax exem pt i on m ay appl y t o p re co n fi rm at i o n tran sfers. I I I . C on c l u s i on F or the foregoi ng re as on s, w e AF F I RM .