Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Hall

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 16, 2010No. 08-17267Published

1DissentPaez, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent. After careful consideration of the majority’s analysis of *1168the relevant bankruptcy code and IRS code provisions, I am not persuaded that § 1222(a)(2)(A) does not entitle the debtors to treat the capital gains taxes arising from the post-petition sale of their farm assets as an unsecured claim not entitled to priority under § 507. In my view, Congress’s intent was clear: it wanted to help family farmers keep their farms by allowing them to sell farm assets to pay off debts without being liable for the full amount of any capital gains tax arising from the sale, regardless…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Knudsen v. Internal Revenue ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
  2. Internal Revenue Service v. Ficken (In Re Ficken)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Tenth Circuit · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API