Had 341 meeting in District 9 today .....info re. retirement contributions

[NeedOptions]

Thanks guys and gals. While I understand why the courts would rule this way, I just don't like it.

[LadyInTheRed]

Thanks guys and gals. While I understand why the courts would rule this way, I just don't like it.

I think it is a terrible message to send that retirement savings is not a necessary expense. The Tax Code encourages retirement savings, why shouldn't the Bankruptcy Code? Some of us spent years trying to pay off our creditors instead of saving for retirement only to see very small decreases in the debt we owe. We even took loans and withdrawals from our retirement plans before realizing we were fighting a losing battle. My plan allows me to save for retirement and I think all plans should.

When we don't like the way the courts interpret the law, we should ask our representatives to change the law. I just wrote to my Congresswoman asking her to submit legislation to amended the bankruptcy code to clarify that retirement savings is a necessary expense. I encourage anyone else who agrees with me on this issue to do the same. It only takes a few minutes.

[AngelinaCat]

What I wonder is: Okay, the trustee decides that you have to liquidate your Retirement Fund to satisfy a debt. Who gets the Federal Income Tax penalty? You, the debtor, or the trustee? I suspect the poor debtor.... and that just 'ain't' right, when one is trying for a 'new start'.

[LadyInTheRed]

What I wonder is: Okay, the trustee decides that you have to liquidate your Retirement Fund to satisfy a debt. Who gets the Federal Income Tax penalty? You, the debtor, or the trustee? I suspect the poor debtor.... and that just 'ain't' right, when one is trying for a 'new start'.

I don't think they'll be able to make people liquidate their retirement fund if their confirmed plan allowed them to contribute to it. I think the worse they can do is petition to modify the plan so you can't continue the contributions. You would have to take the income tax effects of eliminating the contribution into account when determining the new plan payment. At least that is the position I would insist my attorney take.

Hey Des, I noticed that the Parks opinion hasn't been published yet. Isn't it true that an unpublished opinion cannot be relied on as precedence? Does the BAP ever not publish its opinions or is it just a matter of time?

[LadyInTheRed]

Hey Des, I noticed that the Parks opinion hasn't been published yet. Isn't it true that an unpublished opinion cannot be relied on as precedence? Does the BAP ever not publish its opinions or is it just a matter of time?

Never mind. I just found the opinion with a big stamp on the top "ORDERED PUBLISHED".