Filed September 22, 2011
The Sixth Circuit later limited its holding in the Omegas case, noting that the policy of ratable distribution to creditors that was the basis for that decision “would not be relevant where the property at issue was not subject to distribution to creditors.” See McCafferty v. McCafferty (In re McCafferty), 96 F.3d 192, 196 (6th Cir. 1996) (citing Begier, 496 U.S. at 58). That is precisely the circumstance here.
Filed August 17, 2012
As discussed, however, Congress intended that property sought by the trustee through an avoidance or recovery action have the status of property of the estate for purposes of that action only. See Begier, 496 U.S. at 58-59; French, 440 F.3d at 152. With that status, such 5 The recovery provision in Bankruptcy Code Section 550(a) incorporates the avoidance provisions by reference, and thus necessarily reflects the same Congressional intent in favor of extraterritorial application.
Filed March 31, 2017
The Form 941 payroll taxes that were not paid did not come from Access Behavioral’s funds; instead, they were funds held in trust by Access Behavioral, to be paid over to the United States. See Begier v. Internal Revenue Service, 496 U.S. 53, 55 56 (1990). Access Behavioral is saying, in effect, that despite holding funds in trust for the United States, the failure to pay over those funds is not their fault, even though it was their own employee that they hired and supervised that failed to pay the funds over, and even though, as a matter of law, “misplaced reliance on an agent” can never constitute reasonable cause for failure to pay taxes.
Filed July 13, 2015
Ex. G 134:16-18; see Begier v. IRS, 496 U.S. 53, 58 (1990) (“Equality of distribution among creditors is a central policy of the Bankruptcy Code. According to that policy, creditors of equal priority should receive pro rata shares of the debtor’s property.”)
Filed March 2, 2012
This legislative history is especially relevant where, as here, it is the only legislative record and represents the explanation of the statute’s terms by the legislator most involved in the negotiation and enactment of the legislation. See Begier v. IRS, 496 U.S. 53, 64 & n.5 (1990) (treating floor manager’s floor statements “as persuasive evidence of congressional intent” in light of “absence of a conference and the key roles played” managers in legislative process). Case 1:11-cv-02075-RJL Document 20 Filed 03/02/12 Page 40 of 75 - 32- whether to include or exclude.
Filed December 21, 2007
As a corollary to this rule, any preference recovery must be distributed to the unpaid creditors of the debtor; it cannot be distributed to the debtor itself or to its equity holders (and their separate estates), as the ART seeks to do here. See Begier v. IRS, 496 U.S. 53, 58 (1990) Case 1:05-cv-09050-LMM-RLE Document 216 Filed 12/21/07 Page 35 of 51 - 27 - (the purpose of Section 547 is “to preserve . . . the property available for distribution to creditors”); In re Se. R.R. Contractors, Inc., 235 B.R. at 622 (“a preference recovery by a trustee in a bankruptcy case . . . is . . . to be distributed only to the creditors in the case”).
Filed July 28, 2016
Begierv. IRS; 496 U.S. 53, 58 (1990); see also 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1) (defining the debtor’s property interests as including “all legal or equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the commencementofthe case”). Since “[p]roperty interests are created and defined by state law,” Butner v. United States, 440 USS. 48, 55 (1979), we “look to state law to determine property interests” of the debtor, In re Perl, 811 F.3d 1120, 1127 (9th Cir. 2016).
Filed May 13, 2016
Stettner v. Smith (In re IFS Fin’l Corp.), 669 F.3d 255, 261 (5th Cir. 2012) (“Property of the debtor” that can be avoided and recovered under sections 544 and 550 is “that property that would have been part of the estate had it not been transferred before the commencement of the bankruptcy proceedings.”) (quoting Begier v. I.R.S., 496 U.S. 53, 58 (1990)). Moreover, that interest must be more than “bare legal title” to the property.
Filed May 2, 2014
The portion of the taxes that are withheld from the employee’s wages, or “trust fund taxes,” are for the exclusive use of the United States and are not to be used as working capital for the business or to pay the employer's business expenses, including payroll. 26 U.S.C. §§ 3102(b), 3403, 7501(a); see also Begier v. Internal Revenue Service, 496 U.S. 53, 60-61 (1990) (stating that the act giving rise to tax liability, e.g., payment of wages, gives rise to a statutory trust in favor of the United States). Section 6672 of the Internal Revenue Code provides for the assessment of a Trust Fund Recovery Penalty, equal to the amount of unpaid trust fund taxes, against any person required to collect, truthfully account for, or pay over the employment taxes, who, in that capacity, willfully failed to collect, truthfully account for, or pay over the trust fund taxes. Case 8:14-cv-00018-DOC-AN Document 6 Filed 05/02/14 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:16 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 that Novelli moved to Mexico, where he had previously maintained a vacation home.
Filed October 5, 2009
Conway also directed National’s employees to keep the IRS fully informed of the liabilities and of National’s efforts to repay the debts. 202 Begier v. United States, 496 U.S. 53, 60 (1990). 203 See Slodov, 436 U.S. at 256 (applying an “accepted principle of trust law” in a trust-fund tax case).