Brenda Tanksley

In re
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING
BRENDA TANKSLEY,
Debtor.
)
)
) 	Case No. 07-20717
) 	CHAPTER 13
)
ORDER ON TRUSTEE'S OBJECTION TO CLAIM NO. 20
FILED BY BRENDA TANKSLEY
On February 18,2009, the Trustee's Objection to Claim No. 20, filed by Brenda
Tanksley ("Debtor") and the Debtor's response came before the Court for a telephone
hearing. The Court ,after hearing the arguments of the parties, requested simultaneous
briefs from the parties. Upon review of the record, the Court is prepared to rule.
The facts are undisputed by the parties. Debtor filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy
relief on November 27, 2007. Her plan was confirmed August 14, 2008. The last day for
governmental units to file a proof of claim was May 25, 2008. On October 24, 2008, the
Natrona County Treasurer filed a priority claim in the amount of $831.20 for the 2007
real estate taxes on Debtor's residence located at 261 South Lennox Street, Casper,
Wyoming. The Trustee objected to the claim. The Natrona County Treasurer did not
respond and an order denying the claim as tardily filed was entered. On December 17,
2008, the Debtor filed a priority claim in the amount of $831.20 pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§
507(a)(8) and 1305(a)(l), respectively. The trustee objected to the claim as a tardily filed
claim.
Case 07-20717 Doc 93 Filed 04/09/09 Entered 04/09/09 15:16:15 Desc Correct
Main Document Page 1 of 4

Discussion
The Debtor argues that the claim should be allowed under § 1305, that states, as
relevant:
"(a)( 1) A proof of claim may be filed by any entity that holds a claim
against the debtor -for taxes that become payable to a governmental unit
while the case is pending ...
(b) a claim filed under subsection (a) of this section shall be allowed or
disallowed under section 502 of this title, but shall be determined as of the
date such claim arises, and shall be allowed under section 501(a), 502(b), or
502(c), of this title, or disallowed under section 502(d) or 502(e) of this
title, the same as if such claim had arisen before the date of the filing of the
petition."
The Court considers the following issues in order to resolve this matter:
( 1) 	Is this a claim for tax or consumer debt?
(2) 	If it is a tax debt, did it become payable while the case was pending?
(3) 	Does the debtor having standing to file a proof of claim on behalf of the
"governmental unit"?
The parties do not argue that this is a tax debt. 	The claim is for the 2007 tax bill
to the Natrona County Treasurer for the Debtor's residence.
Page 2
Case 07-20717 Doc 93 Filed 04/09/09 Entered 04/09/09 15:16:15 Desc Correct
Main Document Page 2 of 4

The Court applies Wyoming law to detennine when the tax became payable. The
Wyoming Statute states: "Fifty percent (50%) ofthe taxes are due on and after
September 1 and payable on and after November 10 in each year and the remaining fifty
percent (50%) of the taxes are due on and after March 1 and payable on and after May 10
of the succeeding calendar years ... ,,1
In the Debtor's case, her 2007 tax bill total was $831.20. Fifty percent ofthat, or
$415.60 was due on and after September 1 and payable on and after November 10 of
2007. The debtor filed her bankruptcy on November 27,2007. The first half of the
Debtor's 2007 tax bill was a pre-petition debt. 	Section 1305 is inapplicable to that
portion of this claim. The remaining fifth percent of the taxes were due and payable after
the petition was filed and would be considered a post-petition debt.
Finally, the court must consider whether the debtor may file a claim on behalf of a
taxing authority with respect to the postpetition portion of the claim. With one exception,
courts have held that the debtor may not file such a claim 2• There appears to be three
bankruptcy courts in the Tenth Circuit that follow the holding that a debtor may not file a
postpetition claim on behalf of taxing authority. The Bankruptcy Court's analysis in In re
Flores 3 discusses the statutory construction of § 1305. That Court detennined that there
IWyO. Stat. 39-13-1 08(b )(i) (2007).
2That exception is In re Zook, 144 B.R. 489 (Bankr. D. Idaho 1991), which was cited by
the Debtor.
3In re Flores, 270 B.R. 203 (D. Tex. Laredo Div., 2001).
Page 3
Case 07-20717 Doc 93 Filed 04/09/09 Entered 04/09/09 15:16:15 Desc Correct
Main Document Page 3 of 4

does not appear to be any statutory authority for the debtor to file a proof of claim for a
creditor for postpetition claims that relate only to postpetition activity. The Court
distinguishes Bankruptcy Code §50 1(c) that authorizes a debtor to file a proof of claim on
behalf of the creditor if the creditor does not file the claim timely. The Court determined
that since there is no deadline for filing a postpetition claim on behalf of a credit, the
debtor's right under §501(c) never arises. "Congress used different words in §1305 when
it dealt with postpetition claims. Based on the different language and on the legislative
history, the Court concludes that differences were intended.,,4 This Court agrees. The
Debtor does not have statutory authority to file a claim on behalf of Natrona County
Treasurer for the remaining fifty percent of the postpetition debt.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED the Trustee's Objection to Claim No. 20 is
granted and the claim is denied.
DATED this + 	day of April, 2009.
Service to:
Stephen Winship
Mark Stewart
4Flores at 209
Page 4
By the Court
Case 07-20717 Doc 93 Filed 04/09/09 Entered 04/09/09 15:16:15 Desc Correct
Main Document Page 4 of 4