Northern California Bankruptcy Lawyer

On The Bankruptcy Soapbox

The Soap Box

California Gets New Homestead

By

California homestead

The California Legislature enacted a dramatic increase to the state’s homestead law at the very end of the legislative session in August. It became effective September 18, 2020.

The dollar amount of the homestead increased to a minimum of $300,000 and a maximum of $600,000. Gone is the link between marital status or dependents. Every homeowner is entitled to the homestead amount.

Recognizing that home values vary widely in the state, the new law establishes a homestead greater than $300,000 where the median price of a home in the county exceeds that floor. Regardless of the median price of homes, no one gets a homestead in excess of $600,000.

Finally, the dollar amount of the homestead will be adjusted by inflation, going forward.

Here’s the text of the bill itself, showing the language it replaces.

Homestead unknowns

At this writing, we don’t know whether the new homestead becomes effective when the governor signs the bill, which was the intent of the drafters, or whether it’s effective January 1, 2021.

The uncertainty is the product of last minute procedural manoeuvres that pulled this provision out of a larger emergency bill to be stand alone legislation.

The other unknown is what data base will serve as the reference point for the median price of a home in each county.

Homestead certainties

What we know about the new homestead is that it protects family homes from forced sale in and out of bankruptcy.

In state courts, the homestead acts as a check on the ability of a creditor to force the sale of a home to collect a judgment. That works by requiring that any forced sale pay the homeowner the homestead amount before taking any sales proceeds for himself.

In bankruptcy, the homeowner can claim the homestead and the same restrictions on sale apply to a Chapter 7 trustee. So now, a far larger swathe of homes are protected from sale by the larger homestead floor.

The homestead also plays a part in Chapter 13. While there are no forced sales of homes in 13, the amount of non exempt equity often determines how large the monthly Chapter 13 payments must be. That’s because one of the “rules” in Chapter 13 is that if the debtor gets to keep his assets, creditors must get as much as they would have if the debtor had filed Chapter 7. We’ve nicknamed the “best interests of creditors” test for plan confirmation.

I’ve often seen homeowners who can’t get relief in bankruptcy without putting their home at risk of forced sale or at risk of a Chapter 13 plan payment that is simply too large to manage.

Homestead updated

The original purpose of the homestead was to protect an amount of money that is required to keep a roof over a family’s head.

Prior to this change, the increase in the cost of homes left the homestead outdated. The homestead before this bill only protected about 15% of the value of the typical California home.

We’re now far closer to achieving that goal and preserving home ownership for everyone.

More on homesteads

How the homestead works

Which chapter is best for me

Why I love Chapter 13

The Easiest Business Loan In Town

By Leave a Comment

Easy loans have consequences

Running a small business is hard work.  

Cash flow is tight; time is in short supply.

When there’s just not enough in the bank to cover payroll, the easiest loan in town is from the Bank of Uncle Sam.

There’s no application, no review, no waiting.

You just give employees their checks, net of the amounts withheld.  You can repay the withheld amounts when cash flow is better, you tell yourself.

Up until now, that maneuver was costly and the financial consequences unavoidable.  Now, in California, it’s also criminal.

California employers exposed

Senate Bill 390, signed into law in October, 2013, makes it a crime for an employer to fail to pay over to taxing authorities money withheld from employees’ paychecks.

As little as $500 unpaid, and the matter is a felony.  The easy “loan” can result in hard time.

Responsibility for payroll taxes

Incorporating a business appears insulate the owners and managers of a business from liability for the debts of the business.

Payroll taxes, or more precisely, trust fund taxes, are an exception.

Trust fund taxes is the label given to the amounts that are withheld from an employees wages.  The withholding includes the employee’s contribution to FICA or Social Security, as well as the employee’s income tax withholding.

The employer holds those funds in trust.  The funds belong to the employee and are entrusted to the employer to transmit to the appropriate state and federal tax authorities.

Failure to remit withheld taxes

Both federal and California law hold corporate management personally responsible if the corporate employer doesn’t pay over the withheld funds.

The tax folks see it as almost theft or embezzlement when the employer diverts that money to the corporation’s purposes.  Even if  management sees the  failure to pay as a matter of survival, there’s little understanding available if you short the taxes.

If the money is withheld from the employee’s paycheck, the tax authorities will give the employee credit for the withheld money.  They see the employee as having done everything expected of him.

The tax authorities then pursue with a vengance every person in corporate management who could have signed the check to remit the funds as expected.

So the liability for the quickie loan spreads over all individuals with decision making power in the business.

Trust fund liability not dischargeable in bankruptcy

Civil liability for unpaid trust fund taxes cannot be wiped out in a bankruptcy filing.

The responsible-person penalty for failing to pay trust fund amounts is collectible for 10 years from assessment.

So, even before it became criminal, handing out net checks and pocketing the difference had consequences.

Now, the consequences include conviction for a crime.

Warning signal

If you are faced with an approaching payroll, and no way to pay all of the taxes and withholding associated with payroll, it’s time to have a serious discussion about the future of the business.

It’s one thing to fail in business;  it’s quite another to become a felon.

Image courtesy of Flickr and Infomatique.

California Bankruptcy Law Is All Our Own

By

california bankruptcy law

California Bankruptcy law is a lot like a unicorn….appealing but imaginary.

Instead, we have bankruptcy in California, where the landscape is shaped by community property;  state exemptions, large mortgages, and the 9th circuit court of appeals.

Like the Merced River cutting through the granite of Yosemite, those factors alter the bankruptcy landscape here.

Community property

California community property law defines what assets of a married couple come within the control of the bankruptcy court. While there are other community property states, it is the law of each state that defines how community property is created.  State law also defines the rights of creditors in that community property.

Whether one spouses files, or both join in a bankruptcy case, all of the community is available to the creditors of the marriage.

In return, after the bankruptcy all community property is forever protected by the discharge.   Post bankruptcy wages and purchases are beyond the reach of creditors.

Even when only one spouse files, all the community gets protection from creditors who had claims when the case was filed.

Much different from the treatment of marital property other places.

Two California exemption laws

While bankruptcy is federal law, California state law defines  exemptions.  Exemptions specify assets a debtor can protect from creditors in bankruptcy.

Exemptions are the only place in bankruptcy that the law is explicitly different from state to state.

Congress, in a legislative compromise in 1978 on the adoption of the Bankruptcy Code (back when Congress knew how to compromise), states were given the option to opt out of the federal bankruptcy exemptions in favor of the state’s exemptions.

In response, California’s legislature gave debtors a choice:  the existing state law exemptions found in Code of Civil Procedure 704, or a special set of California bankruptcy exemptions starting at CCP 703.140.

California homestead increased to better match home values

Mortgage debt dominates

California boasts (or suffers) home loan balances that make eyes bug in other states.  The cost of housing here skews family budgets, leaving less for other living expenses.

Why the means test is toothless in the Bay Area

For many years, credit cards were used to fill the gap between the available income and the expectations of comfortable living.

For homeowners, the deduction for mortgage payments on the means test assures most homeowners that they pass the means test.

The increasing cost of renting has sharpened the drive to save a house from foreclosure, at whatever cost.

Bankruptcy can often make that possible in Chapter 13.

9th Circuit shapes us

California bankruptcy judges are bound by the decisions of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The circuit courts can only be overruled by the Supreme Court.

So, the decisions made by the 9th Circuit on bankruptcy issues drive outcomes that may be different from outcomes in other circuits.

Recently the 9th Circuit made some very satisfying decisions for bankruptcy debtors, including allowing lien stripping in Chapter 20;  granting attorneys fees to debtors who win bankruptcy disputes with their creditors; and slapping down bankruptcy trustees who sought to disqualify Chapter 13 debtors who had secured debts for non essentials.

And, the 9th Circuit rejected its earlier, horrible decision about making debtors whole when creditors violate the automatic stay.

Bankruptcy the product of our environment

So, sorry to disappoint, there is no “California bankruptcy law.”

There’s just the granite of the Bankruptcy Code, fractured, shaped, and worn by the economic and legal realities of California.

And the resulting landscape is generally awesome.

More on California

The California fair debt collection law

California limits on debt collection

If you’re sued in California courts

Why Bankruptcy Means Test Is Paper Tiger In Bay Area

By

4530662416_a4ed18bb3b_z (1)

Bankruptcy’s means test is a paper tiger in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Really!

You can see why few Bay Area residents are constrained by the means test when you compare the latest median income figures  used in the means test with the allowed cost of rental housing here.

To review:  Congress  in 2005 tried to write a universal formula to limit bankruptcy relief to those who “needed” it. Bankruptcy judges were to be stripped of discretion in favor of a formula that would be universal.

Those whose average income in the past six months exceeded the median for their state would have to show that they had little more than $200 a month left over after subtracting some standardized allowances for food, clothing and housing and their actual projected expenses for other allowed costs of living.

Never fear, the cost of housing in the Bay Area stands this formula on its head.  (While the exact numbers have changed since 2016, when this piece debuted, the principle remains the same.)

The means test numbers

The means test starts with the median income in the state for a family of each size.  Income numbers and the fixed deductions from income are updated twice a year.

The new numbers become effective for cases filed April 1, 2016 or after.  

Newer numbers don’t change the story

Our survey says, the median income in California for a single person household is $ 50, 579.  Make a dollar more than that and you have to pass the means test to file Chapter 7.

That median income translates to a monthly gross income of $4215 for one person.

How does that work in the Bay Area?

Bankruptcy in San Mateo County

Apply the new cost of housing numbers, and passing the means test is a piece of cake:

The allowed deduction for rent for a single person in San Mateo County is $2508.  Non rent costs of housing like utilities add $461 a month to the cost of putting a roof over your head.

Seventy percent of a median income single worker’s gross income goes to housing! Most financial advisors target 31-35% of gross income for the cost of housing.

A single person in San Mateo County would have to gross nearly $9000 a month before their housing expenses were only one third of their gross monthly income.

Since the numbers vary by the size of the family, let’s look at a hypothetical  family of four in San Mateo County.

Median income for a family of four in California is $81,837, or $6820 a month, before taxes and other deductions.

Rent in San Mateo County for those four people is $3462, with an additional $636 in additional housing expense.

Our median income family is paying 53% of their gross income for housing.  They’d have to gross $12,418  before the allowed cost of housing was only one third of their income.

With slight variations, the result is the same for all Bay Area counties.

What the numbers mean for Bay Area debtors

It’s no news that it costs a lot to live in the Bay Area.

After you’ve put a roof over your head, there isn’t a lot left for all the other things that you need, like food, transportation and health care.  All of those things are deductible on the means test as well.

Not to mention reserves for the unexpected, savings for college, and provision for retirement.

So, if you are servicing credit card debt, you are probably spending money on long ago purchases that is desperately needed  for current expenses.

Know that the means test is not likely to bar you from bankruptcy.

Only you know what is keeping you from a fresh start.

More about deciding about debt

Alternatives to bankruptcy

What holds you back

Bankruptcy makes the future better

Image:  licensed under Creative Commons license by Cucchiaio

Updated with April, 2016 numbers.

Who Gets Grannie’s Cash – Grannie Or The Bankruptcy Trustee?

By

joint accounts bankruptcy

When there’s a joint bank account and a bankruptcy filing, good intentions can quickly go sour.

The bankruptcy trustee sees a pile of money in the bank to which the debtor has access, even though the account also bears the name of someone not in bankruptcy.

If the debtor can get the money, the trustee contends, so can a bankruptcy trustee for the benefit of creditors.

Well and good, if the money belongs to the debtor. But what if it’s really someone else’s money?

Do it yourself elder care

Who doesn’t have a joint bank account with someone they care about?

Most often, it’s the adult child’s name on an elder’s bank account.  It’s simple, convenient, and reassuring that if the elder loses capacity, a trusted party has access to pay the elder’s bills.

But if the trusted party loses a lawsuit, or files bankruptcy, all bets are off.  The elder’s money in a joint account  looks like money that belongs to the child.

And the elder’s funds are at risk of being seized to pay someone else’s debts.

Who gets the cash?

The answer lies in state law, since state law determines what the debtor owns, while bankruptcy law determines what happens to that property.

In California, the answer lies in Probate Code 5100 and the statutes following.

“[a]n account belongs, during the lifetime of all parties, to the parties in proportion to the net contributions by each to the sums on deposit, unless there is clear and convincing evidence of a different intent.” (Cal Probate Code, § 5301, subd. (a))1
 
“In the absence of proof otherwise” the net contribution of each of the parties is deemed to be an equal amount. § 5134, subd. (b)(2).
 
That’s a vast improvement over the prior law that presumed that the people named on the account owned the money equally.
 
California’s statute is based on the Uniform Probate Code, which drafts laws for adoption by the states to make law more uniform.
 
So, the result of the “joint account in bankruptcy” issue may be different in other states.
 

Avoid a fight over joint bank account

More important than who wins a legal battle is the chance to skip the fight altogether.

Debtors need to disclose joint accounts to their attorneys.  Don’t fall into the “it’s not my money” trap and keep quiet about it.  As I said, that’s a trap.

Why you don’t want your attorney to fight for you

Attorneys need to quiz their clients about such arrangements and get all the bank account statements.  See what the situation will look like to the trustee.

Know what state law says on the subject.

Consider, if the money in fact is traceable to someone other than the debtor, having that person withdraw it from the joint account before filing.

Make it your goal not to have someone else’s money in an bank account to which the bankruptcy debtor has access.

All involved might consider use of a revocable trust as a vehicle for the elder to empower another to manage their money in the face of incapacity.

This post draws on the always-comprehensive observations of Oakland bankruptcy attorney Larry Szabo.  Thanks, Larry, for your boundless willingness to share.

Image courtesy of Flickr & Duncan Hull

Marital Separation Doesn’t Require Two Homes

By

8071542885_3e3e19e278_h_opt

Split the sheets in California, and your wages are no longer community property.

That’s because property acquired during marriage but after a marital separation isn’t community property.

That’s been California law for a long while.

The sticky wicket has been drawing the line when the marriage has broken down and the couple has separated.

“When” they separated determines whether the estranged spouses have to split their earnings with each other.  It determines whether the creditors of one spouse can reach the wages of the other to pay the other’s debts.

Can estranged spouses live under the same roof and be living “separate and apart”?

Supreme Court makes separation expensive

In 2015, the California Supreme Court ruled that a couple isn’t “separated” when they live in the same house.  Even when they  shared little else besides the address.

In the Bay Area,  land of ruinous housing prices, I’ve seen many estranged couples continuing to share a house for a long while because neither can afford to move out.

Yet, according to the Davis decision, a couple is not separated and they continue to acquire community property until they no longer live in the same dwelling.

New law looks beyond common address

The justices kinda invited the legislature to change the law if they didn’t like the Davis result.  And they did.

New California law provides that spouses can live “separate and apart” under the same roof for purposes of California community property law.

Seven things you probably didn’t know about community property

The new law makes determining the date of separation messier, but more in conformity with economic realities.

A court trying to determine whether assets are community property has to look beyond the residence address.  Other indicators, not just where the spouses live, can show that there is no intention to resume the marriage.

Why this matters

Assets acquired during marriage and before separation are community property.  Simplest example is wages.

But suppose one spouse starts a business or writes a best seller when the marriage is rocky.  If there has been no separation, the business or the book royalties must be divided equally.

If STBX files bankruptcy

If the spouses have separated, different result.  The new asset is the sole property of the spouse who created it.

Or, more prosaically, suppose one spouse buys an expensive new car.  If they’ve separated, the debt is exclusively the responsibility that of the borrower.  If they aren’t living “separate and apart”, the debt is payable from the community.

Dividing debts in divorce

The new look at what it means to live “separate and apart” will inject more reality in the the “when” question, at the expense of making the determination more complex.

More

When your STBX files bankruptcy

Image courtesy of  John Getchel  under a Creative Commons license.

California Courts Provide On Line Help

By

legal helpIndividuals with matters before the state courts of California have an updated resource in the Self Help Center.

The information here can be either good background if you have a legal problem or a treasure-trove if you expect to represent yourself in court.

It even includes a section on bankruptcy, as part of the materials on Problems With Money.

Bankruptcies are actually filed in the federal bankruptcy courts, but the information offered is sound.

Image courtesy of Wikimedia

The Secret Bankruptcy Discharge For Community Property

By

When only one spouse files

 

Psst!

Let me tell you a secret about bankruptcy law.

You can get 3/4 of the benefits of a bankruptcy discharge without ever going near a bankruptcy court if you are a married person in California, or any other community property state.

If your spouse files bankruptcy and you don’t join in, you still reap much of the protection from your creditors that you would get if you had filed.

How can that be?

It’s the law,  a little known feature of the bankruptcy code that applies to a bankruptcy discharge in a community property state.  §523(a)(5)

Here’s how and why it works this way.

When only one spouse files

Spouses aren’t required to file bankruptcy together.  They can file together, but they don’t have to.

But even if only one spouse files, all of the community property of the marriage becomes property of the bankruptcy estate.

7 Essential things about community property

In return, the community property gets a bankruptcy discharge, just as though it was a separate person.  (Which is why I sometimes  say that, in a community property state, each marriage is a menage a trois.)

The discharge protects not only the property that the couple owned when one spouse filed bankruptcy, it protects community property that they acquire in the future.

The creditors who are affected are the creditors who had claims against the community property when the bankruptcy was filed.  Not just creditors of the debtor, the person who filed bankruptcy.   The creditor’s claim could be one against the non-filing spouse, and the discharge protects the non filer’s community property.

It doesn’t surprise us that the spouse who elects bankruptcy is protected.  What is mind blowing is that the creditors of the non filer are equally barred, after the discharge, from reaching the couple’s community property on account of the non filer’s debts.

Post bankruptcy wages are immune

It’s worth repeating this because 1) it’s so important, and 2) it is so hard for creditors to grasp:

the paycheck of the married person is protected from garnishment for that person’s own debts incurred before the bankruptcy,  for all time during the marriage, by reason of their spouse’s bankruptcy discharge.

For most couples, their paychecks are their most important asset outside their homes.  Paychecks are the most easily garnished by a creditor with a judgment.

And the community property discharge protects those wages for so long as there is a marital community.

What is left for creditors of non filer

A legitimate creditor of a non filing spouse, after a bankruptcy discharge, can effectively only enforce its debt against the separate property of the non filer.

Separate property in California includes

  • acquired before marriage
  • acquired by gift during marriage
  • inherited during marriage

The community ceases to exist at divorce or death.  Whatever a spouse is awarded in the division of property is that person’s separate property.

So, after divorce, the non filer’s separate property could be vulnerable to claims that were discharged against the community, assuming that the passage of time hasn’t invoked the statute of limitations on collection suits.

The community property discharge doesn’t prevent a creditor from suing the spouse who didn’t file bankruptcy.  It just limits the assets from which that debt can be collected.

So your creditors can only collect what you owe them from your separate property, if you have any.

Pretty neat, eh?

More

When the bankruptcy trustee asks about your missing spouse

Image courtesy of Openclipart.com

New California Bankruptcy Exemptions

By

california exemptions

Californians filing bankruptcy got an increase in the exemptions that protect their assets on April 1, 2019.

New: exemptions for money in the bank added in 20202

Every three years, the dollar amounts are adjusted for changes in the cost of living.

Californians don’t get to protect possessions under the Bankruptcy Code’s exemptions.  Instead, a California resident who files bankruptcy must use California exemption law. That’s the case even though bankruptcy is governed by federal law.

Don’t shed a tear for the bankruptcy exemptions:  the state exemptions are arguably better.

You have a choice of two exemption systems.  One choice is the standard California state law exemptions found in Code of Civil Procedure 704. These are the exemptions  applicable in state law collections as well as bankruptcy.

The second choice, appealing to those without significant equity in their home, is the California bankruptcy exemptions found at CCP 703.140(b).

What do debtors get to keep

Here’s the new  list of increasedCalifornia bankruptcy exemptions:

Principal residence$29,275
Vehicles$5,860
Household goods per item$725
Jewelry$1,750
Grubstake$1,550
Business assets$8,725
Loan value of life insurance$15,650
Personal injury claims$29,275
Other misc. exemptions703.140

Californians, because they are required to choose one state exemption system or the other rather than the federal bankruptcy exemptions, can also use the federal list of non bankruptcy exemptions.

Bankruptcy wild card exemption

wild card exemption

The trickiest part of the California bankruptcy exemptions is what’s called the “wild card”. (It’s also called the “grubstake”.)    When 703.140(b)(1) and (b)(5) are added together, the debtor can protect $30,825 of equity in any asset or combination of assets.  That’s the wild card.

The wild card amount can be parceled out to protect some cash in a bank account;  some equity in a vehicle that exceeds the car exemption; stock; a  business or whatever else you have.

The point is that the exemption isn’t restricted to a certain kind of property. It can be used to protect anything.

How exemptions work

Exemptions protect the specified amount of equity in an asset.

If it’s a house, the exemption protects a certain amount of value in the property that exceeds the liens on the property.  It doesn’t matter if the value of the house is $200,000 or $1,200,000.  The exemption protects the specified amount of equity in the house.

Homestead amount slated for large increase in fall of 2020.

If there is equity in a house over and above the total of liens and the homestead, a Chapter 7 trustee can sell the house and give the debtor the homestead exemption in cash.

That doesn’t happen very often.  Because, there has to be enough equity to pay the exemption, the costs of sale, any capital gains taxes and the trustee’s commission before the sale benefits creditors.

More about secret exemptions

If neither California exemption system adequately protects your  assets, consider Chapter 13.

More

Exemptions in Chapter 13

Debts of spouses

k2d2vaca.

When Your Bank Account Is Seized: California Action Plan

By

 

bank levyTime is short when you get a notice that a creditor has levied your bank account.

California has protections that may allow you to recover money that’s been seized.

But success in getting your money back depends on prompt action and following the procedures.

Bank levy basics

A creditor with a judgment is entitled to levy your bank account to collect the money you owe.

All about judgments

You have an offsetting right to keep some money by claiming exemptions.

A levy only catches the money that is in your account when the levy is served.  It doesn’t affect money deposited to the account later.

Your bank has few choices when a levy is served.  By law, it must hold the money in the account on the day the levy is served for the creditor.

And it must deliver to you a notice of the levy and information about your rights to claim exemptions.

What you can keep

Let’s assume that the money in the levied bank account consists of your wages.

California exemption law protects a minimum of 75% of take home pay.  A non-support creditor simply can’t reach the 75% that is exempt. Cal. Code of Civil Procedure 704.070.

If your wages were already garnished before they were paid to you, what you take home is exempt from further levy.

And, you may be able to protect more than 75% of your wages if you show that you need more than 75% to provide for yourself and your family.

California law grants absolute protection to the assets of and distributions from private retirement plans and retirement-focused profit sharing plans.  CCP 704.115.

Public retirement benefits are also exempt.  CCP 704.110.

Federal law protects Social Security.

Claiming funds exempt

Here’s what you need to do to contest the levy.

When a bank account is levied,  CCP 700.010 requires the levying officer to serve on the judgment debtor these documents:

  • the writ of execution (issued by the court)
  • a notice of the levy
  • a list of exemptions prepared by the Judicial Council

The last item, the list of exemptions, is your key to regaining some part of the bank balance if they are traceable to wages.

The notice of levy contains the critical instructions and the time line:

To claim an exemption, you complete the Claim of Exemption form and give it to the levying officer, typically the sheriff.  If you contend that the levied money is necessary for your support and for the support of your dependents, you also complete the Financial Statement.

The judgment creditor then has a choice.  It can agree that the levied funds are exempt and they are returned to you.  Or, the judgment creditor can set a hearing before a judge to challenge your claim of exemption.

Serve papers on time

The burden is on you as the judgment debtor to complete your clams of exemption and get them back to the levying officer on time.

A successful claim of exemption protects your funds from this levy.  While it may give the creditor some visibility into your finance, it doesn’t solve the bigger problem created by the judgment.

Consider consulting with a credit counseling agency or a bankruptcy lawyer to assess the bigger picture of your finances.  Even if the creditor has a judgment, the debt may still be dischargeable in bankruptcy.

More

Collection lawsuits in California

Property safe from creditors under California law

Myths about bankruptcy

Image © vladimirfloyd

643 Bair Island Road
Suite 403
Redwood City, CA 94063
Phone: (650) 694-4700

Categories