text:
Zelna Jansen Consultancy
About Zelna
Toggle navigation Zelna Jansen Consultancy
Complaint regarding hate speech towards the Coloured community - 2021-01-06
To: South African Human Rights Commission &n... more
Digital Inequality - The Next Great Divide PPF WC 9 Aug 2020 - 2020-08-20
The lockdown due to Covid19, has changed our way of life. Constraints on in-person contact, the elimination of large gatherings and conferences has amongst others, changed how we work, interact and learn. It also glaringly exposed, how the spatial, economic and social inequalities which were characteristic features of the apartheid period have ... more
Concourt ruling, a win for the people and democracy - 2020-06-29
Click Here To Read More: https://www.voices360.com/economy/concourt-ruling-a-win-for-the-people-and-democracy-49303039 ... more
Why has the High Court declared the regulations invalid and unconstitutional? - 2020-06-29
Click The Link To Read More: https://www.voices360.com/economy/why-has-the-high-court-declared-the-regulations-invalid-and-unconstitutional-48913644 ... more
Let the people be heard and answered - 2020-06-29
Click The Link To Read More: https://www.voices360.com/politics/let-the-people-be-heard-and-answered-48498974 ... more
Limiting rights is becoming a bitter pill for citizens to swallow - 2020-06-29
Click The Link To Read More: https://www.voices360.com/lifestyle/limiting-rights-is-becoming-a-bitter-pill-for-citizens-to-swallow-47663298 ... more
How far have our rights been encroached on in the national lockdown? - 2020-06-29
Click The Link To Read More: https://www.voices360.com/community-development/how-far-has-our-rights-been-encroached-on-in-the-national-lockdown-47037958 ... more
Submission on the Draft Streets and Public Places and the Prevention of Nuisances Amendment By-law - 2020-06-29
Click Here To Read The PDF Document ... more
The Public Procurement Bill, do we need it? - 2020-06-29
Click The Link To Read More: https://www.voices360.com/economy/the-public-procurement-bill-do-we-need-it-46772649 ... more
How far has our rights been encroached on in the national lockdown? - 2020-04-22
The President, in his message to the nation on 21 April 2020, acknowledged that the "nation-wide lockdown is having a devastating effect on our economy", however, he emphasised, "it is nothing compared to the catastrophic human, social and economic cost if the coronavirus could spread among our people unchecked". Th... more
Zelna Jansen Consultancy's submission on Draft Public Procurement Bill. - 2020-04-16
What the State of the Nation Address and Budget Speech means for small business - 2020-03-03
A study conducted in October 2019, by Retail Capital, entitled, "Roll With The Punches", found, among other things, that collectively, small businesses employ 10.8 million people. This accounted for 66% of all formal jobs. It further found that small businesses contributed 20% of the GDP. These figures do not include i... more
Active citizenry is required to hold politicians to account - 2020-02-03
Read the full articles here: https://www.iol.co.za/news/opinion/active-citizenry-is-required-to-hold-politicians-to-account-41059233 https://www.voices360.com/community-development/active-citizenry-must-be-developed-41158798 ... more
Beyond voting, democracy needs ongoing public participation - 2020-01-08
Read the full article here: https://www.voices360.com/politics/beyond-voting-democracy-needs-ongoing-public-participation-37128154 ... more
Being an active citizen is key for good governance - 2020-01-08
Involve public in new laws - 2020-01-08
Parliament, the Constitution and accountability to the people - 2019-10-11
The Sixth Parliament kicks off in the wake of revelations of alleged corruption brought to light at the judicial commission of inquiry into allegations of state capture. We recall in October 2017, the then Minister of Finance, announced a budget deficit of R48,2 billion. Later that very same year, the Auditor General announced that over... more
Parliament must educate the people about what it does 2019-10-04 - 2019-10-08
My opinion editorial was published in the Cape Argus, 4 October 2019. I push the narrative around public participation and closing the gap between the public and policy- and law-makers for effective oversight and implementation. ... more
The Sixth Parliament has its work cut out - 2019-02-27
In the piece below, I analyse, comment and pose questions to the discussion between the Standing Committee on Finance and Judge Nugent on the findings and recommendations of the Nugent Commission of Inquiry into the Tax Administration and Governance of SARS. CLICK LINK TO READ : https://www.voices360.com/economy/the-sixth-parliament-has-its... more
To amend or not to amend; that is the question? - 2018-09-07
Earlier this year, the National Assembly of Parliament adopted a resolution, mandating its Constitutional Review Committee (CRC) to review section 25 of the Constitution in terms of how the state can expropriate land without compensation in the public interest. This resolution has been debated at length in Parliament. In response... more
Justice or judicial overreach: Are Concourt's declaratory orders cause for concern? - 2018-08-16
The constitutional court (ConCourt) case of Corruption Watch v the President of the Republic of South Africa (CCT331/17) (hereafter NPA Case), demonstrates how various branches of government can usurp the power of the other. The Concourt in the NPA Case, not only ordered that the termination of the contract of the former National Director of Pub... more
Spheres of Govt, Separation of Powers, NA, NCOP - 2018-08-14
WATCH: Separation of Powers: SASSA, CPS, Funding of Political Party Bill - 2018-08-03
Watch: NHI, BRICS & Land Expropriation - 2018-07-26
The thorny issue of party funding - 2018-07-20
Funding of political parties can be used as a tool for influence and/ or bribery. A funder can steer the policy direction of a political party or who a government department awards a tender to. Access to information about who funds political parties is therefore crucial in enhancing transparency and holding politicians accountable. I... more
The National Minimum Wage still a work in progress - 2018-06-28
The Select Committee on Business and Economic Development (NCOP committee) commenced public hearings on the Basic Conditions of Employment Amendment (BCEA) Bill, the National Minimum Wage (NMW) Bill and Labour Relations Amendment (LLR) Bill on 19 June 2018. The NMW Bill sets the NMW at R20 per hour. The Bill further proposes the esta... more
PetroSA governance fuels NCOP debate! - 2018-06-14
The Constitution provides Parliament with the power to conduct oversight of all organs of state, including those at provincial and local government level. The National Council of Provinces (NCOP) conducts oversight over national entities with a focus on provincial interest. As part of this function, the Central Energy Fund (CEF) briefed... more
Caution and consultation should be prescribed for the NHI Bill - 2018-05-24
Leading up to the Minister of Finance (MoF) delivering the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement (MTBPS) in October/November this year, parliamentary committees are conducting oversight over departments and government entities. The MTBPS will provide an indication of the state of government finances. In the MTBPS of 2017, the then MoF ann... more
Parliament demands tougher action against illicit tobacco - 2018-05-10
The Standing Committee on Finance (SCoF) held a meeting on the illicit trade in tobacco on the 2 May 2018. The briefing flowed from public hearings on the 1% VAT, fuel and other increases proposed by National Treasury (NT). SCoF highlighted in its report on the public hearings on the Fiscal Framework Policy dated 6 March 2018, that more... more
Parliament to hold hearings on land expropriation without compensation - 2018-04-16
Following the National Assembly resolution, the Constitutional Review Committee, will review section 25 of the Constitution with the aim of ascertaining how land could be expropriated without compensation. Under current legislation, the state can expropriate land but the Constitution stipulates a "just and equitable" compe... more
PLUGGING THE BUDGET DEFICIT – EXPLORING ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF INCOME - 2018-04-11
By now we're all starting to feel the impact of the 1% VAT, fuel and other increases. Despite an outcry against the VAT increase from various trade unions, NGOs, civil societies and associations and citizens, National Treasury (NT) was of the view that the 1% VAT increase was the best measure to fund the budget deficit of R48,2 billion.... more
Demystifying the Budget Process at Parliament - 2018-03-08
The Minister of Finance delivered his Budget Speech on 21 February 2018. Many was surprised at the 1% increase in Value Added Tax (VAT). This despite the warning signs when the Minister of Finance announced in the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement (MTBPS) in October 2017, that there was a deficit of R48 billion deficit and National Tr... more
BUDGET SPEECH / POLICY STATEMENT HIGHLIGHTS - 2018-02-21
1. WHERE WE ARE The 2017 GDP growth projection has been revised upward to 1%, which is higher than the 0.7% expected at the time of MTBPS last year. Growth is expected at 1.5% in 2018, rising to 2.1% in 2020. Government faces revenue gap of R48.2 billion in the current year 2. TAX PROPOSALS New tax measures will rai... more
Parliamentary hearings on the "Debt Bill" - 2018-02-15
The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) briefed the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry on its view on stakeholders' submissions to the Draft National Credit Amendment Bill, 2018 (hereafter the Debt Bill), on 14 February 2018. The briefing forms part of the continuing public consultations on the Debt Bill. In terms of ... more
Parliament questions Steinhoff - 2018-02-01
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance, Standing Committee on Public Services Accounts and Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises held a joint meeting with Steinhoff International Holdings Netherlands (hereafter Steinhoff) executive team and other affected stakeholders on 31 January 2018. The Honourable Chairperson Yunus Carrim... more
Demystifying the Impeachment of the President case - 2018-01-18
The constitutional court (Concourt) case of the Economic Freedom Fighters and Others v the Speaker of Parliament and the President of the Republic of South Africa [Case CCT 76/17], ruled that the National Assembly (NA) failed to make rules regulating the removal of the President in terms of section 89(1) of the Constitution and ordered the NA... more
Chairpersons and the Trias Politica: Parliament's role in the Separation of Powers priniciple - 2017-12-14
The Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises kicked off its enquiry into allegations of corruption and maladministration into power utility Eskom on 1 August 2017. The committee has held several hearings and has called many stakeholders to give evidence. The enquiry will continue next year and at the conclusion of the hearings, the com... more
Access to Cannabis for medical use widened - 2017-11-23
The late Hon. Mario Oriani-Ambrosini, Member of Parliament (MP) introduced the Medical Innovation Bill (hereafter the Bill), in September 2014. Hon. Oriani-Ambrosini (MP) was then diagnosed with terminal lung cancer and commenced a campaign to legalise the medical use of cannabis. The objectives of the Bill are to: legalise and regulate... more
Sugar tax to be imposed in April 2018 - 2017-11-09
Parliament's Standing Committee on Finance adopted the Health Promotion Levy (HPL) also known as the sugar tax. The levy stems from the National Department of Health's (DoH) Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) Strategy which identifies sugar, salt, alcohol and tobacco as risk factors that cause NCDs. The Strategy recommends var... more
Is it constitutional to exclude Coloured / First Nation persons from B-BBEE? - 2017-10-24
I was privy to a media statement from the Nelson Mandela Foundation (NMF), a response to an earlier statement emanating from Kwa-Zulu Natal (KZN) and which was calling for the exclusion of Coloured and Indian persons from Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE). The NMF statement had unequivocally voiced its disapproval of the KZN sta... more
Can the Speaker establish a multi-party committee to investigate the President? - 2017-10-12
The motion of no confidence in the President was held by secret ballot on 8 August 2017. The National Assembly (NA), first debated the motion which was then followed by a vote by secret ballot. The motion was defeated with 198 votes against, 177 for and nine abstentions. In an application to the Constitutional Court (Concourt), the E... more
Women in work...burdens and challenges - 2017-08-31
According to the United Nations, The World's Women 2015: Trends and Statistics - · one-in-three women have experienced physical/sexual violence at some point in their lives; · most of this violence is intimate partner violence[1... more
An overview of laws seeking to address gender equity in South Africa - 2017-08-08
Seventy years ago, 20 000 women marched to the Union Buildings to petition against laws that required black South Africans to carry the "pass". National Women's Day commemorates these heroic women. But it is also an opportunity to draw attention to significant issues that South African women still face, such as dom... more
Land reform must be constitutional - 2017-07-06
Restitution of land concerns the painful and emotive subject of colonial and apartheid era land dispossession. And it is understandable, because of the socio-economic impacts of this action: the ejection from homes; the forcible loss of properties; severing from kin, friends and neighbours; the wrenching of those affected from their... more
We, the people shall govern – Concourt's letter to Parliament - 2017-06-23
The Constitutional Court (Concourt) delivered a watershed judgement yesterday. It ruled that the Constitution gives the Speaker of Parliament the discretion to determine the voting procedure in a motion of no confidence in the President and must not be exercised arbitrarily or whimsically. I was surprised by the Concourt's exorbitant... more
Public Hearings on Proposed Sugar Tax on Sugar Sweetened Beverages - 2017-06-02
Parliament held public hearings on the Amendment Revenue Laws Bill, also known as the Health Promotion Levy on Sugar Sweetened Beverages on 31 May 2017. In 2016, the Minister of Finance announced that there will be a tax on sugar sweetened beverages. Following the Minister's policy statement/ announcement in February 2016, National Treasur... more
Small Business Budget Vote - 2017-05-19
The Minister for Small Business Development delivered the budget vote for her department. Parliament has to approve the budget. The Minister highlighted that her department has created awareness of small business needs within various government depts. This is important as the President stated that 30% of government procurement must be allocated t... more
My blog item on the motion of no confidence appeared in the Sunday Independent, 23 April 2017 - 2017-05-03
Motion of no confidence in the President - 2017-04-18
Parliament has become the epitome of political interactions. And rightly so, as it is where elected representatives of the people, i.e. Members of Parliament (MPs), from various political parties gather to make laws and conduct oversight over the Executive. In doing so, Parliament must also be alert to involving the public in its processes. Recentl... more
Eskom Contractor Academy Graduation Ceremony - 2017-04-03
I attended the Eskom Contractor Academy Graduation Ceremony in my capacity as Deputy Chairperson of Business Western Cape. The aim of the Academy is to assist, develop and equip emerging contractors and suppliers with financial, legislative, management, leadership, entrepreneurial and technical. I liked what the MC said and these words resonated wi... more
My blog item published as opinion editorial (oped) in Weekedn Argus - Sunday Edition "Court Ruling on ICC withdraway added voice of the people" - 2017-04-03
President al-Bashir matter and the interaction in the trias politica - 2017-03-17
The Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Co-operation (PC) held a meeting on 8 March 2017. The aim of the meeting was for the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development to provide feedback on the High Court ruling of DA v Minister of International Relations and Co-operation. The High Court ruling i... more
Opinion Editorial (Oped) on the Parliamentary Comm meeting on the proposed sugar tax published in the Sunday Independent on 26 February 2017 - 2017-03-13
DEPUTY PRESIDENT RESPONDS TO QUESTIONS IN THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, PARLIAMENT - 2017-03-10
As part of Parliament's oversight function of holding the Executive (Cabinet: President, Deputy President, Ministers and Deputy Ministers), Members of Parliament (MPs) can ask questions to the Executive. Other oversight mechanisms include for example: An MP asking questions either in the caucus, study group, in the National Assem... more
Let's Talk - 2017-02-16
2016 has been a tumultuous year politically and economically. Our democracy has definitely grown and developed with so many conversations taking place in so many forums. In the run up to the State of the Nation Address (SoNA), there have been several networking functions. One of which, I was personally involved, namely: Deputy President, HE Cyril R... more
State of Nation Address Summary - 2017-02-14
SUMMARY OF STATE OF THE NATION ADDRESS 2017 The State of the Nation Address (SoNA) is an occasion whereby the President accounts to Parliament and the Nation on what Government has done in 2016 and provides an overview of what Government plans to do in 2017. The summary below focusses on what Government plans to do in 2017. 1. Entrepreneurshi... more
Blog 7 Feb 2017 – Joint meeting with SC: Finance and PC: Health on the proposed sugar tax held o 31 January 2017 - 2017-02-07
The Minister of Finance last year announced that there will be a tax on sugar sweetened beverages. National Treasury published its Policy Paper on Taxation of Sugar Sweetened Beverages in July 2016 inviting comments from the public. The Minister will make a statement regarding the proposed tax during the Budget Speech in February 2017. Thereafter, ... more
Copyright © 2021 Zelna Jansen Consultancy. All Rights Reserved.
these terms of use; and any other relevant specific terms, policies, disclaimers, rules and notices agreed between the parties, (including any that may be applicable to a specific section or module of the website); we, us, or our means Zelna Jansen Consultancy, the owner of the website. It includes our officers, agents, employees, owners, co-branders and associates where the terms limit or exclude our liability; you or your means any visitor to this website, including any other person, website, business or agent (including any virtual or robotic agent) associated with the visitor.
6. Contact us You can contact us with privacy related questions at info@zelnajansenconsultancy.co.za address


text:
Bankruptcy District Courts
United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Texas
In Re Nowlin , 366 B.R. 670 ( 2007 )
366 B.R. 670 (2007)
In re Pamela Page NOWLIN, Debtor.
No. 06-34785.
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division.
*671 Reese W. Baker, Baker & Associates, Richard W. Aurich, Jr., Attorney at Law, Houston, TX, for Debtor.
Kenneth Paul Thomas, Office of Chapter 13 Trustee, William E. Heitkamp, Houston, TX, for Trustee.
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON ORDER DENYING CONFIRMATION OF DEBTOR'S AMENDED CHAPTER 13 PLAN
[Docket No. 22]
JEFF BOHM, United States Bankruptcy Judge.
Pamela Page Nowlin (the Debtor) filed a proposed Chapter 13 plan which would last *672 60 months. Although the Debtor has a 401(k) loan obligation which will be satisfied on month 24 of this proposed plan, the proposed plan payments are not scheduled to increase in months 25 through 60. David Peake, the Chapter 13 Trustee (the Trustee), opposes confirmation of the Debtor's proposed plan, arguing that the money being used to retire the 401(k) loan obligation in the first 24 months should thereafter be deemed part of the Debtor's disposable income for the remaining portion of the plan. The issue presented to this Court is whether the Debtor may continue to claim the amount of her 401(k) loan repayment as 4 qualified retirement deduction after the loan is fully satisfied,[1] or whether these freed up funds should be considered part of the Debtor's "projected disposable income" pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b) in the months after the loan is satisfied.[2] For the reasons set forth below, this Court finds that the Debtor's current plan should not be confirmed because after the 401(k) loan payments cease, the amounts previously used to make those payments should be considered part of the Debtor's projected disposable income.
The Court makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law under Bankruptcy Rule 9014, and under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52, as incorporated into Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7052. To the extent that any Finding of Fact is construed to be a Conclusion of Law, it is adopted as such. To the extent that any Conclusion of Law is construed to be a Finding of Fact, it is adopted as such. The Court reserves the right to make any additional Findings and Conclusions as may be necessary or as requested by any party.
II. FINDINGS OF FACT
The following are the relevant facts, either as stipulated to or admitted by counsel of record or as admitted in the filings, or as testified to by the Debtor, set forth in chronological order:
1. On September 14, 2006, the Debtor filed a voluntary Chapter 13 petition. [Docket No. 1.]
2. On September 14, 2006, the Debtor also filed her Schedule I, which shows current monthly income deductions of $1,062.51 for her contribution to a 401(k) retirement plan, and $1,134.79 for the repayment of a 401(k) loan. [Docket No. 1.]
3. On September 14, 2006, the Debtor also filed her Schedule J, which lists a monthly net income after expenses of $195.64. [Docket No. 1.]
4 On December 7, 2006, the Debtor filed her amended Chapter 13 Plan (the Plan). [Docket No. 22.] The only change in the amended Plan was an increase in the amount of the IRS' claim; the Debtor did not change the proposed monthly payment amount of $195.00.
5 The Plan proposes to pay unsecured creditors a total of only $980.45 over the 60 months of the Plan; this amount represents a 3% dividend. [Docket No. 22.]
6. On January 22, 2007, the Court held a confirmation hearing on the Plan. *673 At this hearing, the Debtor testified that the 401(k) loan would be fully satisfied by no later than month 24 of the Plan. The Debtor further testified that $15,000 per annum ($1,250 per month) was the maximum amount that she is allowed to contribute to her 401(k) plan.
III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A. Jurisdiction and Venue
This Court has jurisdiction over this Adversary Proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 157(b)(2)(A) and (L). Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1408.
B. Construction of 11 U.S.C. § 1325 and the Court's Role in Confirming the Plan
In the case at bar, the Trustee contends that the Plan cannot be confirmed because the Debtor has not dedicated all disposable income to the Plan during the applicable period pursuant to the requirement of § 1325(b)(1)(B).[3] Stated another way, the issue is whether cash applied towards a 401(k) loan, which will be satisfied during a proposed 60-month plan, is obligated thereafter to be applied to the plan because those future available funds should be deemed "projected disposable income" under § 1325(b)(1)(B). Although many changes were made to § 1325 upon the passage of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA), the amendments did not directly address 401(k) loans which are satisfied during the applicable commitment period and the classification of the resulting available funds.[4]
1. The Definition of Projected Disposable Income under § 1325(b)
The Court begins its analysis with the definition of the phrase "projected disposable income" as it is used in § 1325(b)(1)(B). Although § 1325(b)(1)(B) uses the exact phrase "projected disposable income," § 1325(b)(2) only provides a definition of "disposable income," unmodified by the word "projected":
For the purposes of this subsection, the term "disposable income" means current monthly income received by the debtor . . . less amounts reasonably necessary to be expended —
(A) (i) for the maintenance or support of the debtor or a dependent of the debtor. . . .; and
(ii) for charitable contributions. . . .
Section 1325(b)(3) in turn defines what expenses are "reasonably necessary" by reference to the so-called means test in § 707(b)(2). Additionally, "current monthly income" is a defined term in § 101(10A) and has the same meaning in both Chapter 7 and Chapter 13.[5] The sum of these *674 definitions and cross-references, however, does nothing to address the meaning of the word "projected" as it modifies the phrase "disposable income."
Since "projected" is not defined by the Code, some courts have looked to the dictionary definition, which is "[t]o calculate, estimate, or predict (something in the future), based on present data or trends." In re McPherson, 350 B.R. 38, 44 (Bankr. W.D.Va.2006); In re Jass, 340 B.R. 411, 415 (Bankr.D.Utah 2006). In using a dictionary definition of "projected" to modify "disposable income," those courts have concluded that the phrase is "future-oriented, that is, they are amounts that arise in the future." McPherson, 350 B.R. at 44. This line of cases contradicts the type of "snapshot" theory proposed by the Debtor. This "snapshot" argument is that post-BAPCPA, the calculation of disposable income in Chapter 13 is defined by reference to the Chapter 7 means test and the means test is to be calculated only on the date of filing. Thus, the Debtor argues that disposable income can only be determined on the petition date and that the meaning of projected is just to multiply that monthly available amount by the 60 months in the plan, ignoring any foreseeable, definite events that would change the calculation of disposable income. This Court has already rejected this interpretation of the means test in the context of § 707(b)(2). In re Singletary, 354 B.R. 455, 464 (Bankr.S.D.Tex.2006). Relying upon a pre-BAPCPA Fifth Circuit case, In re Cortez, 457 F.3d 448 (5th Cir.2006), this Court held that the means test had a more fluid, continuing use beyond the date of the petition, describing it as "neither exclusively backward-looking, nor forward-looking, but a combination of both." Id.
The phrase "projected," as it modifies "disposable income" in § 1325(b), must be given greater meaning than merely instructing the Debtor to multiply her disposable income as of the petition date by the length of the Plan. Instead, this Court holds that "projected disposable income," as it is used in § 1325(b), requires the Debtor to account for any events which will definitely occur during the term of the Plan that would alter either the income or expense side of the disposable income calculation. See In re McPherson, 350 B.R. at 43 ("The word `projected' in the phrase `projected disposable income' modifies each of the component parts of `disposable income', that is, it modifies `current monthly income' and it modifies `amounts reasonably necessary to be expended for support.'")[6]
Applying this rule to the facts in the present case, after the Debtor has repaid her 401(k) loan obligation in month 24, the funds that were previously used to make those payments must be included as part of the Debtor's disposable income because, as the Debtor herself testified, the satisfaction of the loan obligation is set to occur at a definite time during the term of the Plan and the Debtor knew this fact at the time of filing her petition. In other words, the Debtor is able to "project" that at a *675 specific point in time during the Plan, an event will assuredly occur that will significantly alter the amount of her disposable income, and thus under § 1325(b) her Plan must account for this change in circumstances.[7]
Support for this Court's holding can be found in In re Lenton, 358 B.R. 651, 2006 Bankr.LEXIS 3649 (Bankr.E.D.Pa. Dec. 15, 2006), which analyzed this same factual issue-the treatment of 401(k) loan payments after the loan is satisfied — but in the context of § 707. That court stated:
Debtor's argument also ignores two important realities. First, 401(k) loan repayments are finite; a loan will eventually be paid off. Second, a Chapter 13 case is prospective, i.e., it encompasses a debtor's current and future financial circumstances for a period of three to five years. Section 1322(a) requires that a Chapter 13 plan "provide for the submission of all or such portion of future earnings or other future income of the debtor to the supervision and control of the trustee as is necessary for the execution of the plan." Id. (emphasis added). Section 1325(b)(1)(B) requires debtors to use all of their "projected disposable income" over a commitment period of three to five years. See e.g. In re McPherson, 350 B.R. 38, 43-44 (Bankr.W.D.Va.2006). Furthermore, § 521(f) requires a debtor, upon request, to file tax returns and updated statements of income and expenses during the pendency of the case. Excluding 401(k) loans from the means test evidences a "wait and see" approach that would channel debtors with such expenses into the longer period of bankruptcy supervision of Chapter 13 rather than the relatively short tenure of a Chapter 7 case, notwithstanding that doing so might result in a zero payment plan. However, because, as here, 401(k) loans might be paid off within the commitment period of a Chapter 13 case, the ability to increase the monthly plan payment would direct newly available funds to creditors. Such an approach serves both the Congressional intent to protect retirement contributions and "ensure that debtors repay creditors the maximum they can afford," a primary goal of BAPCPA. H.R. Rep. 109-31, pt. 1 at 1, as reprinted in 2005 U.S.C.C.A.N. 88, 89 (2005).
In re Lenton, 358 B.R. 651, 2006 Bankr.LEXIS 3649 at *22-23 (Bankr. E.D.Pa. Dec. 15, 2006)(emphasis added).
Although it was not necessary to the ultimate holding, the court in Lenton at least assumed in its analysis of 401(k) loan payments which would terminate during the plan that the funds formerly used to make those loan payments would instead be redirected into the debtor's plan payments. This Court agrees. Taking this fact pattern to its most extreme hypothetical end, the Court could conceive of a situation where the Debtor filed her plan and there remained only one monthly payment left on a 401(k) loan. According to the Debtor's argument, the snapshot would be taken on the date of the petition, when the debtor owed those funds, and § 1322(f) would exclude that amount from the calculation of disposable income for the entire 60 months of the plan. Starting in the second month of the plan, a debtor would be able to pocket the amount of the 401(k) loan repayment free from the Chapter 13 plan and any claims of her prepetition creditors. Such a result defies logic, invites *676 potential debtors to partake in illegitimate prebankruptcy planning, and would likely violate the requirement in § 1322(a) that the Debtor submit all future earnings to the supervision and control of the trustee as is necessary for the execution of the plan. The Court does not accept this interpretation.
Having determined that "projected disposable income" as used in § 1325(b) requires that the Debtor include as income any amounts currently being used to repay her 401(k) loan after the loan is satisfied in full, the Court now turns to the implications its holding will have upon the specific circumstances of this case.
2. The Debtor's Plan must be amended in accord with this Court's interpretation of "projected disposable income" in § 1322(b).
In the case at bar, the Debtor is currently repaying a 401(k) loan in the amount of $1,134.79 per month, and she testified that the obligation will be satisfied no later than month 24 of the Plan. After the loan is repaid, the Debtor will have 36 months remaining under the Plan, and proposes to use the additional amounts available during those three years to further fund her existing 401(k) account rather than dedicate it to her Plan payments. The Trustee proposes that if $1,134.79 is added to the Plan each month after the 401(k) loan obligation is satisfied, then 100% of the unsecured claims can be satisfied instead of only 3% under the proposed Plan. The Trustee misses the target just slightly: the Debtor may increase her 401(k) contribution amount to the maximum allowed limit and then any surplus over that amount must go to the Plan as projected disposable income.
Under 11 U.S.C. § 541(b)(7), amounts given to ERISA qualified employee benefit plans (EBPs) do not constitute property of the estate. In re Johnson, 346 B.R. 256, 263 (Bankr.S.D.Ga.2006). However, a debtor may only exclude a contribution up to the permitted limit of the EBP. Id. In the instant matter, the Debtor's 401(k) plan allows for no more than $15,000.00 per annum, that is, $1,250.00 per month, to be deducted from her paychecks and put into the account. Presently, the Debtor is contributing $1,062.51 into her 401(k) plan on a monthly basis. Thus, the 401(k) plan only allows for an additional $187.49 ($1,250.00-$1,062.51) to be added to her account per month. Thus, when the 401(k) loan is satisfied, only $187.49 of that newly available disposable income can legally be applied to the 401(k) plan, leaving $947.30 ($1,134.79-$187.49) to be paid to the Trustee for distribution to unsecured claimants.
In defining "projected disposable income," this Court finds the phrase to include any specific changes to the disposable income calculation that will definitely occur during the term of the plan. At the time the Debtor proposed her Plan, she knew of future amounts of money — i.e., the funds in months 25 through 60 after the loan was satisfied — that would become available, but did not include those monies in the Plan. The exclusion of 401(k) loan payments from disposable income under § 1322(f) should not apply to future monies available after the satisfaction of the 401(k) loan obligation. Accordingly, this Court finds that the Debtor has not included all projected disposable income in her proposed Plan, and as such, the Court may not confirm the Plan. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will be entered simultaneously on the docket.
[1] There is no dispute about the Debtor's initial right to exclude the 401(k) loan repayments from her calculation of disposable income pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1322(f). The parties disagree only as to what should happen to those funds after the loan is satisfied and the monthly repayments are no longer required.
[2] Unless otherwise indicated, all section references in this Memorandum Opinion refer to Title 11 of the United States Code. Additionally, reference to the Code means reference to the United States Bankruptcy Code.
[3] Section 1325(b)(1) provides, "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 of the effective date of the plan —
(B) the plan provides that all of the debtor's projected disposable income to be received in the applicable 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.
[4] The phrase "projected disposable income" was carried over from the pre-BAPCPA version of § 1325. While the amendments clarified the meaning of "disposable income," no definition was provided for the word "projected."
[5] Section 101(10A) provides the term current monthly income —
(A) means the average monthly income from all sources that the debtor receives (or in a joint case the debtor and the debtor's spouse receive) without regard to whether such income is taxable income, derived during the 6-month period ending on —
(i) the last day of the calendar month immediately preceding the date of the commencement of the case if the debtor files the schedule of current income required by section 521(a)(1)(B)(ii); or
(ii) the date on which current income is determined by the court for purposes of this title if the debtor does not file the schedule of current income required by section 521(a)(1)(B)(ii). . . .
[6] The Trustee has the power to seek modification of the Debtor's Plan pursuant to § 1329. Thus, if the Court were to hold the opposite and allow the Plan to be confirmed without regard to the definite termination of the 401(k) loan payments, the Trustee would simply file a motion to modify the plan after month 24. The Court's holding avoids the Trustee having to take this unnecessary step of filing for a modification of the Plan. See In re Haley, 354 B.R. 340, 2006 Bankr.LEXIS 2857 at *8-9 (Bankr.D.N.H. Oct. 18, 2006).
[7] By way of example, this rule would apply in the reverse situation where the Debtor was receiving a regular monthly payment as income, but the installments were set to end at a specific time. The Court would allow the Debtor to "project" the change in her current monthly income at that point in the Plan and reduce the monthly payment accordingly.
DocketNumber: 06-34785
Citation Numbers: 366 B.R. 670
Judges: Jeff Bohm
In Re Singletary , 354 B.R. 455 ( 2006 )
In Re Haley , 354 B.R. 340 ( 2006 )
In Re Lenton , 358 B.R. 651 ( 2006 )
In Re Jass , 340 B.R. 411 ( 2006 )
In Re Johnson , 346 B.R. 256 ( 2006 )
In Re McPherson , 350 B.R. 38 ( 2006 )
In re: Deborah Seafort ( 2010 )
Deborah Seafort v. Beverly Burden ( 2012 )
In Re Briscoe , 374 B.R. 1 ( 2007 )
In Re Lasowski , 384 B.R. 205 ( 2008 )
In Re Novak , 379 B.R. 908 ( 2007 )
In Re Vernon , 385 B.R. 342 ( 2008 )
In Re Wilson , 397 B.R. 299 ( 2008 )
In Re Lipford , 397 B.R. 320 ( 2008 )
In Re Meek , 370 B.R. 294 ( 2007 )
Eisen v. Thompson , 370 B.R. 762 ( 2007 )
In Re Leahy , 370 B.R. 620 ( 2007 )
In Re Barfknecht , 378 B.R. 154 ( 2007 )
In Re Egan , 458 B.R. 836 ( 2011 )
In Re Seafort , 437 B.R. 204 ( 2010 )
In Re McCullers , 451 B.R. 498 ( 2011 )
David D. Coop v. Anne B. Lasowski ( 2008 )

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Question: I recently bought Ooma and got it setup and working. I connect a phone to the device, able to make calls, everything worked great.
In my new house, I have one of those Enclosed Network Box in the master bedroom closet. The one can contains junction for all network ports, cable lines, and phone lines for the entire house.
Is there a way to hook up Ooma to that, so I can use any phone line through out the house? Each room in the house has a phone jack.
Anyone tried this and can share their experiences?
But, you don't want to tap into the wire closet usually.
What you do is to disconnect the phone company from the house wiring in the NID outside the house, then you just feed the Ooma dialtone ("phone" port) to any jack in the house and that's it.
But if you have alarm that needs phone signal, then that's a different story.
I dont think any phone company is connected yet.
It is a newly built home, waiting for escrow to hand over the keys in a few days. I hope it is easy to figure out. Never done this before.
Here is my network box. On the outside of my house in the telecom box, it is nothing since it is a brand new house and no tele service yet.
Any idea how to get dialtone through out the house with this?
If you are sure house wires are isolated from the telephone company, then just feed the Ooma dialtone to a walljack and your other jacks should have the Ooma dialtone.
I have a similar setup Wirepath whole home wiring box. However all of my telcom drops are RJ45 not RJ11. How would I punch this down to be able to plug into the scout for whole home ooma?
milehighwelch wrote: I have a similar setup Wirepath whole home wiring box. However all of my telcom drops are RJ45 not RJ11. How would I punch this down to be able to plug into the scout for whole home ooma?


Absolute darling home in The Lady Streets of Southport! All the work has been done! From the new flooring and paint to the beautiful kitchen, you will not be disappointed! Situated on a HUGE corner lot, this pristine home features updated kitchen with corian counters, plantation shutters, newer dual pane windows, new light fixtures, new baseboards, new interior doors, new gutters...the list goes on and on! Hurry before this one is gone!


text:
ALLMAN, Samuel[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13]
1883 - 1948 (64 years) Submit Photo / Document
Name ALLMAN, Samuel
Born 12 Oct 1883 Provo, Utah, Utah, United States [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13]
Died 13 Jan 1948 San Diego, San Diego, California, United States [9, 10, 11, 12]
Headstones Submit Headstone Photo
Family HOCKSTRASSER, Elizabeth, b. 26 Jan 1886, Providence, Cache, Utah, United States , d. 1 Aug 1956, Provo, Utah, Utah, United States (Age 70 years)
Married 24 Dec 1910 Logan, Cache, Utah, United States
+ 1. ALLMAN, Samuel David, b. 10 Mar 1923, Mammoth, Juab, Utah, United States , d. 30 Sep 2017, Bountiful, Davis, Utah, United States (Age 94 years)
Born - 12 Oct 1883 - Provo, Utah, Utah, United States
Married - 24 Dec 1910 - Logan, Cache, Utah, United States
Pin Legend : Address : Location : City/Town : County/Shire : State/Province : Country : Not Set
[S912] S-1487330940.
[S48] GEDCOM File : MASHarris 8.ged, Standard Examiner (Reliability: 0), 19 Dec 2003.
[S13] Unknown, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com. Original data: Family Tree files submitted by Ancestry members.), Ancestry Family Trees.
http://trees.ancestry.com/pt/AMTCitationRedir.aspx?tid=32128504&pid=22868
[S173] Unknown, Ancestry.com, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2002.Original data - United States of America, Bureau of the Census. Fifteenth Census of the United States, 1930. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, 1930. T626,), Year: 1930; Census Place: Mammoth, Juab, Utah; Roll: 2416; Page: 4A; Enumeration District: 8; Image: 439.0; FHL microfilm: 2342150.
Birth date: abt 1884 Birth place: Utah Residence date: 1930 Residence place: Mammoth, Juab, Utah
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=1930usfedcen&h=6859145&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S128] Unknown, Ancestry.com, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.Original data - United States of America, Bureau of the Census. Sixteenth Census of the United States, 1940. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, 1940. T62), Year: 1940; Census Place: Mammoth, Juab, Utah; Roll: T627_4214; Page: 6B; Enumeration District: 12-8.
Birth date: abt 1884 Birth place: Utah Residence date: 1 Apr 1940 Residence place: Mammoth, Juab, Utah, United States
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=1940usfedcen&h=110042130&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S174] Unknown, Ancestry.com, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2010. Images reproduced by FamilySearch.Original data - Fourteenth Census of the United States, 1920. (NARA microfilm publication T625, 2076 rolls). Records of the Bureau of the Census, Rec), Year: 1920; Census Place: Mammoth, Juab, Utah; Roll: ; Page: ; Enumeration District: ; Image: .
Birth date: abt 1883 Birth place: Utah Residence date: 1920 Residence place: Mammoth, Juab, Utah, USA
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=1920usfedcen&h=36881074&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S182] Unknown, Ancestry.com, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2006.Original data - Thirteenth Census of the United States, 1910 (NARA microfilm publication T624, 1,178 rolls). Records of the Bureau of the Census, Record Group 29. National Archives, Wa), Year: 1910; Census Place: Mammoth, Juab, Utah; Roll: T624_1604; Page: 1B; Enumeration District: 0058; Image: ; FHL microfilm: 1375617.
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=1910uscenindex&h=28787488&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S189] Unknown, Ancestry.com, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2005.Original data - United States, Selective Service System. World War I Selective Service System Draft Registration Cards, 1917-1918. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Admin), Registration Location: Juab County, Utah; Roll: ; Draft Board: .
Birth date: 12 Oct 1883 Birth place: Residence date: Residence place: Juab, Utah
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=ww1draft&h=24458094&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S184] Unknown, Utah State Historical Society, comp., (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2000.Original data - Utah State Historical Society. Utah Cemetery Inventory. Salt Lake City, UT, USA: 2000.Original data: Utah State Historical Society. Utah Cemetery Inventory. Salt Lake C).
Birth date: 12 October 1883 Birth place: Provo, Utah Death date: 19 January 1948 Death place:
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=utahburials&h=133085&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S843] Unknown, Ancestry.com, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2000.Original data - State of California. California Death Index, 1940-1997. Sacramento, CA, USA: State of California Department of Health Services, Center for Health Statistics.Original da).
Birth date: 12 Oct 1883 Birth place: Utah Death date: 13 Jan 1948 Death place: San Diego
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=cadeath1940&h=108356&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S913] Unknown, Utah Valley Regional Family History Center, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 1998.Original data - Utah Valley Regional Family History Center. Utah County (UT) Cemetery Index. Provo, UT, USA: Utah Valley Regional Family History Center, 1997.Original data: Utah Valley).
Birth date: 12 October 1883 Birth place: Death date: 19 January 1948 Death place: Utah, Utah
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=utah&h=1288&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S176] Unknown, Ancestry.com, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.Original data - Find A Grave. Find A Grave. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi: accessed 23 March 2012.Original data: Find A Grave. Find A Grave. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-).
Birth date: 12 Oct 1883 Birth place: Death date: 19 Jan 1948 Death place:
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=websearch-4111&h=1213331&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt
[S3] Unknown, Ancestry.com, (Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2013.Original data - Black, Susan Easton, compiler. Membership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1830–1848. 50 vols. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Religious Stud).
Birth date: 12 Oct 1882 Birth place:
http://trees.ancestry.com/rd?f=sse&db=ldsvitalmembership1830-1848&h=1615&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt


text:
Q: Communicating Data Received from Server to Browser in Application based on Vert.x I am developing an application which will show data on browser received from server using Ver.x. So, I have the following modules:
server.java:
NetServer server = vertxx.createNetServer();

    server.connectHandler(new Handler<NetSocket>() {

        @Override
        public void handle(final NetSocket sock) {

            System.out.println("A client has connected");

            while (true) {
                //Sending Message to Client after each five seconds
                Thread.sleep(5000);
                socket.write("HELLO Server: I am Client: " + i);
            }
        }
    });

client.js:
var client = vertx.createNetClient();

client.connect(1234, 'localhost', function(err, sock) {

   sock.dataHandler(function(buffer) {
       //Here I received data sent from server. Now, I want to show this data on browser.
   });
});

So, I want to show data on browser received on client from server. What can be possibilities for this? How I can show this data on browser gradually as received on client from server? Will I have to use some third component like vertex event bus? I need to append it in some HTML file to show data. Thanks

A: why you don't use websockets..also you can check the event bus bridge...which allows you send and receive data from a event bus from your browser (basically you use websocket like other eventBus)
http://vertx.io/core_manual_java.html#sockjs-eventbus-bridge

<script src="http://cdn.sockjs.org/sockjs-0.3.4.min.js"></script>
<script src='vertxbus.js'></script>

<script>

    var eb = new vertx.EventBus('http://localhost:8080/eventbus');

    eb.onopen = function() {

      eb.registerHandler('some-address', function(message) {

        console.log('received a message: ' + JSON.stringify(message);

      });

      eb.send('some-address', {name: 'tim', age: 587}); //--------2)

    }

</script>

here you have a bus in your server named 'some-addres' then you can send data directly from your browser 2)
and you can register a eventbus and send it data from your server...
this is pretty clear, only remember configure your bus correctly allowing or not which bus are visibles from the browser..
vertx.createSockJSServer(server).bridge(config, noPermitted, noPermitted);

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange