Quick Answers to Bankruptcy Questions & Understand How Bankruptcy Laws Affect You

Archive for September, 2008

Two-part rent question?

Sunday, September 14th, 2008
bankruptcy law

I am going to be renting out my 1600 sq. ft. ranch house. I was wondering first what kind of deposit I should require? I had heard that three months was sufficient ($750 per month), but the prospective tenants cannot seem to come up with that. They have, however, agreed to work on the place if I buy the supplies.

Second, if any of you know a web-site I can go to to check the rent history of my prospective tenants (I know that there was a bankruptcy recently, but I also know that they have only been back in Ohio from Florida for four years, and have moved three times in that span; if they move in here, it would be their fourth move, and, as a first time renter, I would not want it to be a disaster. The next door neighbors, who happen to be the brother and sister-in-law of these people, give a good word for them, but I’ve found that relatives generally do. Any suggestions?

Will Democrat tax hikes jeopardize the retirement portfolios of millions of middle-income Americans?

Saturday, September 13th, 2008
bankruptcy law

.

Washington’s ‘War Against Winners’
A cap-gains assault on private partnerships would strike a dagger into the heart of U.S. capital formation.

Last Friday’s precipitous stock-market plunge, with the Dow Jones dropping 185 points, is all about Washington’s continued war on prosperity.

The latest assault comes courtesy of House Democrat Sander Levin. Late last week, he introduced a bill that essentially would abolish the 15 percent capital-gains tax preference for risk investing, and raise it by 20 percentage points to the 35 percent corporate and personal rate. This goes beyond an earlier tax attack on a public offering by the Blackstone Group, and would slam into all private partnerships, including buyout funds, hedge funds, venture-capital firms, real estate partnerships, and oil-and-gas deals.

Incidentally, while attacking capital gains, the congressional Democrats are killing initiatives for across-the-board cuts on wasteful appropriation bills. According to the Club for Growth, House Democrats defeated separate measures that would cut spending by 4 percent, 1 percent, and 0.5 percent.

Does this mean the Democrats favor tax hikes over real spending control? It appears so.

Washington economist Kevin Hassett says this is part of the Democrats’ “war against winners,” and he’s right on the money. In particular, these willy-nilly changes of the tax rules would have a chilling effect on capital formation, and could constitute the biggest attack on capital since the 1930s.

As mentioned, the lightning rod in this tax-hike endeavor was the Blackstone Group, the private-equity giant that went public last week. Blackstone’s investment-fund profits are taxed at the 15 percent cap-gains rate, and since these profits come from high-risk investments, that’s how it should be. But Democrats in Congress view these profits as plain income, and greedily want a higher take.

But plain ol’ income this is not. The recent crack up of two Bear Stearns sub-prime-mortgage hedge funds shows just how risky these ventures can be.

Yes, there’s big money to be made when these private partnerships click. But the economy at large also is a beneficiary. Private buyout funds often save highly troubled companies from bankruptcy. They insert skilled managers who streamline operations and make businesses more efficient, a process that can ultimately lead to greater profits and business expansion. You know a lot of these companies: Chrysler, Staples, Sears, Domino’s, Dunkin’ Donuts, Toys“R”Us, Clear Channel Communications, Hospital Corporation of America. All of these firms were brought back from the dead thanks to private partnerships.

Nobody knows for sure whether Congress will green-light the Democrats’ anti-growth agenda. The hope is that President Bush will veto any tax hike that lands on his desk. But the mere threat that Congress would embark on such a program of wealth destruction and economic impoverishment — all in the name of taxing “rich people” — has investors reeling.

Ironically, a lot of today’s anti-cap-gains momentum is the handiwork of former Clinton Treasury secretary Robert Rubin. He actually believes a low cap-gains tax has no economic growth impact at all. However, back when Clinton and Rubin were running things, the personal income-tax rate was lifted from 31 to 40 percent, while the cap-gains tax was reduced from 28 to 20 percent, making for a 20 percentage point tax advantage for cap-gains over regular income. Flashing forward, the current Bush administration lowered the income-tax rate to 35 percent and the cap-gains rate to 15 percent, preserving that 20 percent differential.

Hmm . . . Is Rubin saying the cap-gains tax advantage was good for the Clinton boom, but not the Bush boom?

Truth is, that differential provides a strong incentive for entrepreneurial risk taking and higher-risk, cutting-edge investment — both of which lend real torque to the economy.

Another unfortunate irony is that while Democrats think they’re striking out at the rich, they’re actually jeopardizing the retirement portfolios of millions of middle-income Americans. Firemen, police officers, and teachers, to name a few, are all represented by the big state and city pension funds. And these funds are heavily invested in the hedge and private-equity funds that the Democratic tax machine is targeting. Is this fact lost on the Democrats? And don’t they realize that two out of every three voters in recent elections owned stocks — either directly or indirectly? Are they attempting to commit political suicide?

If the Democrats get their way, job creation will be adversely affected, too. Clearly, you can’t create new jobs in the private sector unless there’s a new or expanding business to create those jobs. And since new and expanding businesses require capital for investment funding, if you tax that capital more, you get less investment and fewer jobs.

In short, you can’t have capitalism without capital. The process works for “rich people” and the middle class.

Whenever Democrats wage war against the rich, the middle class becomes the collateral damage. This may be the law of unintended consequences, but it is something this Congress fails to understand.
.

________________________________________

Where are bankruptcy laws more strict/harsh: North Carolina or Florida?

Friday, September 12th, 2008
bankruptcy law

Which of these two states makes it harder to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy? (residency requirement, spouse assets, etc)

New Louisiana Bankruptcy Laws?

Thursday, September 11th, 2008
bankruptcy law

Has anyone filed bankruptcy since the “new” laws went into effect and if so would you please share some of your information? ie How much were the legal fees? How much debt is required to be able to file? and how are you living now? Do you rent a home? Please answer! Desperate

In laws threatening Bankruptcy.please help?

Wednesday, September 10th, 2008
bankruptcy law

Ok, my in-laws and my Wife own our Duplex together. All their names are on the Deed for the house. The strange thing is, only my Father in-laws name is on the Mortgage. The problem is, my Mother in-law is threatening to claim Bankruptcy on us so we lose the house. She is a very sick woman with Bipolar disease and refuses to get help. So my question is, can we lose the house if they claim Bankruptcy. It would make no sense to me seeing only his name is under the Mortgage and not ours. If they did claim the Bankruptcy wouldn’t they lose their half of the house.

Is Commom Law legal in Illinois! I need a professional?

Wednesday, September 10th, 2008
bankruptcy law

My fiancee just deceased. We have been together for 14 years. Out of our relationship we had accumulated property, cars, etc. He was not working at the time. I filed bankruptcy because I lost my job. I won my case and a lumpsome of money. I gave him so much money and the property had to be in his name, because of his good credit.
Now since he has deceased, his family is coming after everything I paid for. I have receipts that I gave him money for cars, property and etc, it wasn’t a gift. Do I have any rights?

if your income declines can you still keep your house and vehicle if you file bankruptcy with the new tax law?

Wednesday, September 10th, 2008
bankruptcy law

2 almost 3 months behind on house payment and 2 months on credit cards, current on $18,000 vehicle, owe $70000.00 on a 120,000.00 house 1st lien is 45,000 and 2nd is 25,000

What can we expect?

Wednesday, September 10th, 2008
bankruptcy law

We tried to list our home with a real estate agent. Our house is not worth what we owe. We contacted another real estate broker who is going to buy our home on a short sale. If the short sale is accepted and the house is released, will we owe the rest of the money? Will we owe taxes on the money? I heard that Bush passed a law for Mortgage Debt Forgiveness. Would this pertain to us? I’m hoping that my husband will not have to file for bankruptcy because we can’t pay the remainder. Suggestions or advice would be great. And yes we want out of our house. We do not want to stay here. It is a very long,sappy story. Thanks!

Was Obama not speaking the truth?

Wednesday, September 10th, 2008
bankruptcy law

Put your beliefs about the man aside. I want to know honestly, if there is anything in these statemnts that is not true, from a Hillary supporter.

Obama began by recalling a moment in Tuesday night’s debate when he and his rivals were asked to name their biggest weakness. Obama answered first, saying he has a messy desk and needs help managing paperwork — something his opponents have since used to suggest he’s not up to managing the country. John Edwards said his biggest weakness is that he has a powerful response to seeing pain in others, and Clinton said she gets impatient to bring change to America.

“Because I’m an ordinary person, I thought that they meant, ‘What’s your biggest weakness?’” Obama said to laughter from a packed house at Rancho High School. “If I had gone last I would have known what the game was. And then I could have said, `Well, ya know, I like to help old ladies across the street. Sometimes they don’t want to be helped. It’s terrible.’”

“Folks, they don’t tell you what they mean!” he said. Obama chuckled at his own joke before riffing on another Clinton answer in the debate, when she said that she is happy that the bankruptcy bill she voted for in 2001 never became law.

“She says, ‘I voted for it but I was glad to see that it didn’t pass.’ What does that mean?” he asked, again drawing laughter from the crowd and himself. “No seriously, what does that mean? If you didn’t want to see it passed, then you can vote against it! People don’t say what they mean.

“You know what I’m saying is true,” he said, then addressed his routine directly at audience members who don’t know who they will vote for yet. “Undecideds, remember now, remember what I’m saying.”

He continued by responding to a new Clinton radio ad that accused him of having financial ties to supporters of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site that most Nevadans are loath to come to their state.

“I have said over and over again I’m against Yucca,” Obama said. “I’m against Yucca Mountain. I think the science is not there. I’ve never, I’ve never been for Yucca. Never been for it. Never said I was for it.

“Suddenly you’ve got the Clinton camp out there saying, `He’s for Yucca.’ What part of I’m not for Yucca do you not understand?” he said, then laughed along with his audience.

As the laughter subsided, Obama drove home the broader point he’s been trying to make against Clinton the entire campaign.

“Those kinds of tricks, that kind of approach to politics is what has to stop because what happens is then nobody believes anything,” Obama said. “The voters don’t believe what politicians say. They get cynical. Folks in Congress, they’ll tell you they’re looking out for you — they’re looking out for somebody else. We have to change that politics and that’s why I’m running for president.”
If it’s not true, what’s not true about it?
“While he was giving that speech there was an ad running saying that the Clintons tried to stop people from voting in Nevada. That is a lie. He’s no better than what he is condemning.”

He didn’t run that ad. Research before you speak.
And the Clintons did try to stop people from voting obviously.
The “5 times the vote argument” That situation happening is slim to none, and it’s in effect in all caucus states, because some places have different populations. Do you know what would have to happen for their votes to actually be 5 times more important? I doubt it, you’re too busy listening to Bill.
Hillary endorsed the decision to fight it in court only two days after the culinary union endorsed obama. She was for the caucus locations last year, why is she against them now?

If a co-signer of a loan files Bankruptcy, does it affect the other’s credit rating?

Sunday, September 7th, 2008
bankruptcy law

I think the question speaks for itself, but my mother=in-law has a situation where she co-signed a loan a number of years ago for someone’s car. He’s missed payments and basically screwed the whole thing up..and now he is filing bankruptcy. Will this adversley affect my mother-in-law’s credit any more? thanks.