Ghai Law Firm
Call for a free consultation:
(770) 792-1000
  • ABOUT
    • Testimonials
    • Join Us
  • Practice Areas
    • Personal Injury
      • Pedestrian Accident
      • Car Accidents
        • Speeding Accident
        • Drinking and Driving Accidents
        • Left Hand Turn Accident
        • Rear-End Collision
        • Reckless Driving Accident
        • Uber Accidents
        • Hit-and-Run Accidents
        • Texting and Driving Accident
          • Texting and Driving Under 18
      • Truck Accident
        • Lane Usage Accident
        • Traumatic Brain Injury
      • Product Liability
        • Defective Drugs
        • Defective Medical Device
      • Premises Liability
        • Slip and Fall Accidents
      • Wrongful Death
      • Dog Bite
    • Bankruptcy
      • Debt Relief
      • Credit Card Debt
      • Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
      • Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
      • Foreclosure Bankruptcy
      • Free Legal Case Review
      • Medical Bills Bankruptcy
      • Rebuild Your Credit
      • Wage Garnishments
  • Areas We Serve
    • Kennesaw Personal Injury Lawyer
      • Kennesaw Bankruptcy Lawyer
    • Acworth Personal Injury Lawyer
      • Acworth Bankruptcy Lawyer
    • Marietta Personal Injury Lawyer
      • Marietta Bankruptcy Lawyer
    • Smyrna Personal Injury Lawyer
  • FAQs
  • Blog
  • Videos
  • Contact

Debtors Lose Earned Income Tax Credits

Home » Debtors Lose Earned Income Tax Credits

 

IN RE: ZETO VINCENT ROSS CRYSTAL ROSS Debtors

CASE NO. 12-4937-AJM-7

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

Dated: September 4, 2012

        _______________
Anthony J. Metz III
United States Bankruptcy Judge

ORDER ON TRUSTEE’S OBJECTION TO EXEMPTIONS
        This matter came before the Court on July 25, 2012 for hearing on the Trustee’s objection to the Debtors’ claim of exemptions. The Trustee, Ellen Fujawa, appeared by counsel James Young; the Debtors appeared by counsel, Kimber Leigh Whyte. The Court took ruling on the matter under advisement and instructed the parties to submit legal authorities within 21 days, which they have done. This order shall constitute findings and conclusions to the extent required under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7052.

Background
        The parties have stipulated to the following facts: The Debtors maintained an

Page 2

account at PNC Bank (the “PNC Account:”) which had a balance of $467.16 as of March 15, 2012. The Debtors’ 2011 state and federal tax refunds were deposited via direct deposit into the PNC Account on March 16, 2012 which brought the balance to $10,575.88. Of this balance, (1) $9830 was from state and federal tax refunds (of which $6104 (the “EIC Funds”) were attributable to the federal and the Indiana state earned income credits), (2) $342.79 was a payroll deposit and (3) $46.07 in debit card purchases had been subtracted. The next Monday, March 19, 2012, the Debtors withdrew $9300 from the PNC Account and from that amount, deposited $4000 into an account at Huntington Bank (the “Huntington Account”). The remaining $5,300 that had been withdrawn from the PNC Account apparently was spent by the Debtors and is not at issue here. By the time the Debtors filed this chapter 7 case on April 26, 2012, the balance in the Huntington Account was $2,246.50 (the “Disputed Funds”).

For a free legal consultation, call (770) 792-1000

The Debtors on their Schedule C claimed the Disputed Funds as entirely exempt, alleging that they were derived entirely from the EIC Funds. The Trustee objected to the claim of this exemption, alleging that the commingling of the EIC Funds with non exempt tax refunds and deposits extinguished their exempt nature.

Discussion
        As a preliminary matter, there does not appear to be a dispute that tax refunds attributable to both the federal and state earned income credit are exempt, even after they are in the hands of the taxpayer, unlike ERISA funds and workmen’s compensation benefits. Such earned income tax credits are expressly exempted from the reach of creditors under Ind Code §34-55-10-2(c)(11) which provides for exemption

Page 3

Click to contact our personal injury lawyers today

of a credit “received or to be received”. 1 See also, In re Norwood, 200,9 Bankr. LEXIS 3081 at *8 (Bankr. N. D. Ind. 2009). The only dispute here is how to trace the Disputed Funds and determine whether any of them were derived from the exempt EIC Funds. The starting point, appropriately, is the case of Whitlock v. Public Service Co. Of Indiana, Inc., 159 N.E.2d 280 (Ind. 1959). Both the Trustee and the Debtors cite this case in their briefs filed with the Court for the proposition that trust (exempt) funds that have been commingled with non exempt funds are exempt only to the extent they have been segregated or can be traced back to exempt funds. Id. at 691.

Complete a Free Case Evaluation form now

The Debtors argue that they adequately segregated the EIC Funds by setting aside $4,000, an amount less than the EIC Funds, and depositing that sum into the Huntington Account. The Court is mindful that neither the IRS nor the State of Indiana issued separate refunds for the EIC portion of the refunds and that, the tax refunds contained both an exempt and non exempt portion when they were automatically deposited into the PNC Account. Thus, they were commingled from the moment they were automatically deposited into the PNC Account. Adequately segregating the exempt from the non exempt funds, however, could have been accomplished by withdrawing from the PNC Account and depositing into the Huntington Account the sum of $6,104, the precise amount of the EIC Funds. Instead, the Debtors withdrew $9,300 from the PNC Account and deposited $4,000 of that into the Huntington Account with

Page 4

no rhyme nor reason as to how they arrived at these amounts and no indication as to how the $4,000 deposit correlates with the $6,104 in exempt EIC Funds. Thus, the Court finds that the Debtors have not adequately segregated the EIC Funds such that the Disputed Funds can be traced to them.

The Debtors next urge the Court to trace the Disputed Funds by using the “Lowest Intermediate Balance Test” (“LIBT”) which they assert will result in all of the Disputed Funds being traced to the EIC Funds, and thus, exempt. The LIBT has been applied most frequently where a debtor commingles his own funds with funds he is holding in trust for another. For example, if the account balance is equal to or exceeds the amount of funds held in trust, then the full amount of the trust funds remain intact. If the account balance drops to zero, the trust funds are lost and subsequent deposits into the account are considered non-trust funds and do not replenish the trust fund portion. If the account drops to a balance less than the amount of trust funds, but not to zero, the trust funds are limited to the lowest intermediate balance in the account. Thus, the LIBT is based on the fiction that the debtor would withdraw the non-trust funds first, retaining as much as possible of the trust funds in the account. See, Connecticut Genera Life Ins. Co. v. Universal Ins. Co., 838 F.2d 612, 619 (1st Cir. 1988); In re MJK Clearing, Inc., 371 F.3d 397, 401-402 (8th Cir. 2004); In re Appalachian Oil Co., Inc., 471 B.R. 199 (Bankr. E. D. Tenn. 2012). Courts use the LIBT to separate out funds held in trust for another from the debtor’s funds which are property of the debtor’s bankruptcy estate or where a creditor attempts to impress a constructive trust upon proceeds in the account. See, U.S. v. McConnell, 258 B.R. 869 (N. D. Tex. 2001) (chapter 7 debtor had commingled immigration inspection fees which

Page 5

it held in trust for the Immigration and Naturalization Service); In re Stoler & Co., 144 B.R. 385 (N. D. Ill. 1992) (broker sought constructive trust over funds held by bankruptcy trustee for unpaid commissions); In re LGI Energy Solutions, Inc., 460 B.R. 720 (8th Cir. B.A.P. 2011) and In re Appalachian Oil Co., Inc., 471 B.R. 199 (Bankr. E. D. Tenn. 2012) (in both cases, defendant in preference action asserted constructive trust as defense and argued that transfer was of property held in trust and not of property of the estate).

The Debtor cites one, albeit rare, case where the LIBT was applied to determine not what was property of the debtor’s estate but to determine the amount of exemption to which the debtor was entitled where EIC funds were commingled with non-exempt funds, which is precisely the situation here. See, In re Maine, 46,1 B.R. 723 (Bankr. S. D. Ohio, 2011). In Maine, the debtor received refunds attributable to the federal child tax credit (“CTC”) and the federal earned income tax credit (“EIC”), both of which were exempt under Ohio law. These refunds had been deposited into the debtor’s account and commingled with non-exempt funds. Between the time these deposits were made and the date the debtor filed bankruptcy, there were other withdrawals from and deposits to the account. On the date of her bankruptcy filing, the debtor’s account had a balance of $7,726.02, and the balance in the account never dropped below $6,980, the exempt portion related to the CTC and EIC refunds. The trustee urged the court to use a pro rata method for determining the exempt portion of the account balance. The court rejected the pro rata method and used the LIBT instead, finding that all but $141.72 was exempt.

This Court is of the opinion that the LIBT appropriately may be applied to

Page 6

determine what is property of the bankruptcy estate in two circumstances: (1) where the debtor has commingled his own funds with funds he holds for another in trust, or (2) where, in a case that converts from a chapter 13 to a chapter 7, the debtor has commingled funds acquired pre petition with funds acquired post petition but pre conversion. Neither of those circumstances is present here. Furthermore, the funds in the PNC Account were fungible…certainly the EIC Funds within that account were not specially “marked” to physically distinguish them from the non exempt funds. Thus, this Court sees no logic in assuming that the Debtors first spent the non exempt funds in the PNC Account such that only the EIC Funds were deposited into the Huntington Account, or vice versa. Furthermore, unlike Maine, there is not one, but two bank accounts involved here and the balances in both dropped below the amount of the EIC Funds. Rather than using the LIBT, the fairer way to determine the exempt portion of the Disputed Funds is determine the percentage of the EIC Funds to the PNC Account total and to apply that percentage to the Disputed Funds. The parties stipulated that, as of March 16, 2012 and prior to the withdrawal of $9,300, the PNC Account balance was $10,575.88, of which $6104, or 57.72%, was made up of the EIC Funds. Applying this percentage to the Disputed Funds results in $1,296.68 (57.72% of $2,246.50) in exempt EIC Funds and $949.82 in non-exempt funds.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the Debtors are entitled to exempt $1,296.68 of the Disputed Funds. The Court FURTHER ORDERS that the sum of $949.82 be turned over to the Trustee within 30 days of the date of this order.

Page 7

Distribution:
James T. Young, Attorney for the Trustee, Ellen Fujawa
Kimber Leigh Whyte, Attorney for the Debtors
——–

Notes:

1. Ind Code §34-55-10-2(c)(11) provides:

(c) the following property of a debtor domiciled in Indiana is exempt:

(11) The debtor’s interest in a refund or a credit received or to be received under the following:

(A) Section 32 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the federal earned income tax credit),

(B) IC 6-3.1-21-6 (the Indiana earned income tax credit)

 

Call or text (770) 792-1000 or complete a Free Case Evaluation form

Bankruptcy Blog Posts:

Bankruptcy Filings Continuing To Rise In 2010

Due to high unemployment and an uncertain economic climate, consumer bankruptcy filings in America have increased in 2010. According to statistics reported by the American Bankruptcy Institute, a

Chapter 7 Bankruptcy and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Comparison

Good Morning, this is Roger Ghai of www.Chapter7attorneys.com. I wanted to do a little informational video on bankruptcy options. In particular, Chapter 7 bankruptcy options and Chapter 13 bankruptcy

Filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy – January 2010 Talk Law Radio Show Transcript

Janice: Good afternoon Atlanta and welcome to News & Talk 1380 WAOK. This is Janice Mathis and we’re here this afternoon and every Sat. afternoon at 1pm to talk with one of our lawyers who’s

Difference Between Chapter 13 & Chapter 7 Bankruptcy – March 2010 Talk Law Radio Show Transcript

Janice: Good afternoon Atlanta and welcome to Legal Talk. This is Janice Mathis. This is my favorite hour of the weekend. I learn something new every weekend talking to these brilliant lawyers we have

Bankruptcy FAQ:

Bankruptcy FAQ
Bankruptcy FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions: Table of Contents Who is permitted to file and maintain a chapter 7 case? Who should not file a Chapter 7 case? Is there anything that a person must do

Can Creditors Be Sued For Trying To Collect Debt After You File For Bankruptcy
Can Creditors Be Sued For Trying To Collect Debt After You File For Bankruptcy

The injunction is formally issued pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 362(a), commonly referred to as the Automatic Stay provision of the bankruptcy code, and it prohibits creditors from making further attempts to

Can Your Home Be Sold In Bankruptcy If You Don’t File Bankruptcy But Your Spouse Files Bankruptcy?
Can Your Home Be Sold In Bankruptcy If You Don’t File Bankruptcy But Your Spouse Files Bankruptcy?

In a recent case, In re Beck Mrs. Beck filed for bankruptcy protection but her husband did not. Together they owned a property which was valued at about $530,000.00. The property had actually been in

Can You Claim A Homestead Exemption In A Home You Do Not Live In?
Can You Claim A Homestead Exemption In A Home You Do Not Live In?

The Chapter 7 trustee objected to Mrs. Goulakos’s claim of exemption because she did not live in the house and because she was not the one who claimed the homestead exemption under Massachusetts

Free Case Evaluation

Convenient and Confidential

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Bankruptcy FAQ

    Bankruptcy FAQ

    Can You Keep Your House If You File For Chapter 7 Bankruptcy?

    Can You Keep Your House If You File For Chapter 7 Bankruptcy?

    Can Creditors Be Sued For Trying To Collect Debt After You File For Bankruptcy

    Can Creditors Be Sued For Trying To Collect Debt After You File For Bankruptcy

    Let Ghai Law Fight For You.

    We’re here to provide help when you need us. Fill out this form below and I’ll reach out to discuss your case.

      Ghai Law Firm
      Call for a free consultation:
      (770) 792-1000

      Office Location

      LAW OFFICES OF ROGER GHAI

      1301 SHILOH RD NW STE 430

      KENNESAW GA   30144

      Mon-Fri: 9AM - 6PM

      Important Links

      • About
      • Practice Areas
      • Areas We Serve
      • Contact

      Practice Areas

      Personal Injury Lawyer Bankruptcy Attorney

      Ghai Law Firm

      Cobb County, Marietta, Kennesaw, Acworth

      "The Attorney"

      Site Map
      © Copyright 2023 Law Offices of Roger Ghai
      • ABOUT
        • Testimonials
        • Join Us
      • Practice Areas
        • Personal Injury
          • Pedestrian Accident
          • Car Accidents
            • Speeding Accident
            • Drinking and Driving Accidents
            • Left Hand Turn Accident
            • Rear-End Collision
            • Reckless Driving Accident
            • Uber Accidents
            • Hit-and-Run Accidents
            • Texting and Driving Accident
              • Texting and Driving Under 18
          • Truck Accident
            • Lane Usage Accident
            • Traumatic Brain Injury
          • Product Liability
            • Defective Drugs
            • Defective Medical Device
          • Premises Liability
            • Slip and Fall Accidents
          • Wrongful Death
          • Dog Bite
        • Bankruptcy
          • Debt Relief
          • Credit Card Debt
          • Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
          • Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
          • Foreclosure Bankruptcy
          • Free Legal Case Review
          • Medical Bills Bankruptcy
          • Rebuild Your Credit
          • Wage Garnishments
      • Areas We Serve
        • Kennesaw Personal Injury Lawyer
          • Kennesaw Bankruptcy Lawyer
        • Acworth Personal Injury Lawyer
          • Acworth Bankruptcy Lawyer
        • Marietta Personal Injury Lawyer
          • Marietta Bankruptcy Lawyer
        • Smyrna Personal Injury Lawyer
      • FAQs
      • Blog
      • Videos
      • Contact