This website does not provide legal advice.  It is for informational purposes only. Please do not act or refrain from acting based on anything you read on this site. The information contained in this web site, article or link may be outdated, incorrect or not applicable; it is your obligation to confirm the accuracy. Using this site or communicating with Law Office of D.L. Drain, or any agent/employee of our firm, through this site does not form an attorney/client relationship. This site is legal advertising. Please review the full disclaimer for more information.

It is very important that you obtain legal advice from an experienced attorney regarding your particular situation. Consultation before you take action will certainly cost you less than it will cost to fix your unintentional errors.



All provisions sunset after one year:

• Amends the Small Business Reorganization Act to increase the eligibility threshold to file under subchapter V of chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to businesses with less than $7,500,000 of debt.

• Amends the definition of income in the Bankruptcy Code for chapters 7 and 13 to exclude coronavirus-related payments from the federal government from being treated as “income” for purposes of filing bankruptcy.

• Clarifies that the calculation of disposable income for purposes of confirming a chapter 13 plan shall not include coronavirus-related payments..

• Explicitly permits individuals and families currently in chapter 13 to seek payment plan modifications if they are experiencing a material financial hardship due to the coronavirus pandemic, including extending
their payments for up to seven years after their initial plan payment was due.


This morning (4/24/20), the US Small Business Administration released new set of Interim Final Administrate Rules related to the PPP program. While most of the rules seek to address criticisms about potential abuse of the PPP program, they also address the bankruptcy question. Among other clarifications, the interim final regulations are effective immediately and state the following:

  1. Eligibility of Businesses Presently Involved in Bankruptcy Proceedings

Will I be approved for a PPP loan if my business is in bankruptcy?

No. If the applicant or the owner of the applicant is the debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding, either at the time it submits the application or at any time before the loan is disbursed, the applicant is ineligible to receive a PPP loan. If the applicant or the owner of the applicant becomes the debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding after submitting a PPP application but before the loan is disbursed, it is the applicant’s obligation to notify the lender and request cancellation of the application. Failure by the applicant to do so will be regarded as a use of PPP funds for unauthorized purposes.

The Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary, determined that providing PPP loans to debtors in bankruptcy would present an unacceptably high risk of an unauthorized use of funds or non-repayment of unforgiven loans. In addition, the Bankruptcy Code does not require any person to make a loan or a financial accommodation to a debtor in bankruptcy. The Borrower Application Form for PPP loans (SBA Form 2483), which reflects this restriction in the form of a borrower certification, is a loan program requirement. Lenders may rely on an applicant’s representation concerning the applicant’s or an owner of the applicant’s involvement in a bankruptcy proceeding.

Recovery Rebates:

4/14/20 – press release from UST’s Office of Public Affairs

The USTP provided notice to case trustees on the CARES Act to help ensure that the direct payments that many debtors will receive under the law are protected from turn over during bankruptcy proceedings. “Recovery rebates.

Your clients can update their bank account info on the IRS website in order to change the account for depositing their COVID-19 rebates: “Get my payment”.

Economic Impact Payments | Internal Revenue Service


Forbearance Overview

Section 4022 of the CARES Act allows consumers who have been financially affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and who have a federally backed mortgage to seek a forbearance of their mortgage payments for up to six months, with a possible extension of up to an additional six months. If the consumer seeks such a forbearance and attests to a hardship, the servicer is required to allow for this forbearance. During the forbearance time period, extra interest and fees will not accrue, and the suspension of payments under the forbearance will not impact the borrower’s credit rating. At the end of the forbearance, the payments will come due, provided the consumer and servicer do not reach another arrangement regarding those payments.

Bankruptcy Complications

For consumers outside of bankruptcy, the forbearance process is simple – the consumer contacts the servicer, attests to a COVID-19-related hardship, and receives the forbearance requested. For consumers in bankruptcy, requesting a forbearance due to COVID-19 may be just as simple, but complications arise for the consumer’s attorney, the servicer, and the Chapter 13 trustee. The consumer bankruptcy process requires that all interested parties have notice of the payments that are required during the bankruptcy case. While the consumer and servicer may be aware of the forbearance terms, they must provide such notice to the court and the Chapter 13 trustee as well. Unfortunately, this forbearance does not fit into the generally neat boxes defined by the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure or the CM/ECF process used to file bankruptcy pleadings and notices electronically.


As of now, there has been no nationwide guidance on how servicers should notice forbearance agreements. On a recent webinar provided by the National Association of Chapter 13 Trustees, the panel provided several options that are currently being used. Here are those options with the benefits and difficulties of each:

  1. File a general notice on the docket indicating the terms of the forbearance.
    • This option provides transparency into the forbearance terms and provides flexibility for the servicer. It also allows for any later documents adjusting the terms to be linked.
    • The CM/ECF process may not permit a document like this to be filed without linking to another pleading.
    • This type of notice may be more difficult for Chapter 13 trustees to efficiently process, as their systems generally are more closely tied to the claims register.
  2. File a general notice on the claims register indicating the terms of the forbearance.
    • This option permits the servicer to attach the terms of the forbearance directly to the affected claim.
    • The CM/ECF process typically does not allow for a “general notice” on the claims register, so there is a risk that filing under an available option on the CM/ECF dropdown menu (such as Notice of Payment Change) may be rejected by the clerk of court as a deficient filing.
  3. Write a letter to the Chapter 13 trustee providing the terms of the forbearance.
    • This option eliminates CM/ECF issues.
    • Trustees may not have processes in place to implement these changes solely based on a letter. Additionally, this may not provide the transparency needed since there is no evidence in the docket.
  4. Another option would be to file a modified Notice of Payment Change on the claims register indicating the terms of the forbearance.
    • This option allows for servicers to use a notice function that already exists and is familiar to all parties, and servicers would not need to engage counsel to file these documents.
    • This is not a true payment change, as the forbearance payments are still “coming due.” Additionally, the forbearance will have occurred prior to the filing of the notice, giving rise to timing issues under the requirements of Rule 3002.1(b).

There is no “right answer” for this question. These options all have technical difficulties. We hope for additional guidance in the next few weeks, but for now servicers should work with local firms, be mindful of local practices, and choose the option best suited for them.

After Forbearance

The payments that were delayed due to the forbearance come due in a lump sum at the close of that term. However, this is unlikely to be feasible for consumers affected by COVID-19 and may be less feasible for those in bankruptcy. Servicers are therefore coming to agreements with borrowers to pay back those payments over a longer period of time. These post-forbearance agreements must also be noticed within the bankruptcy process. Absent other guidance, they fit more neatly into the Notice of Payment Change process, with the “new payment” being the original mortgage payment plus the portion of the forbearance mortgage payment. If, however, the post-forbearance arrangement involves a deferral of the payments or other loan modification, a motion to approve the loan modification or separate Chapter 13 trustee approval likely will be necessary, depending on the local rules and orders of the court.

A Final Note

During the forbearance time period, the time for a mortgage loan’s escrow analysis or interest rate change may come. Those payment changes still must be noticed in accordance with Rule 3002.1(b) even though the borrower is not making those payments. This permits the Chapter 13 trustee to keep track of the amount due during the forbearance period.

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP – Christopher L. HawkinsChristy W. Hancock and Alexandra Dugan

On Child Tax Credit, the letter cites

Instruct chapter 7 trustees not to attempt to take child tax credit payments. The Rescue Plan Act provides vital support for children, taking many out of poverty, through the enhanced child tax credit. Child tax credit payments will be made monthly, as a form of additional income. The expectation of such postpetition income should be treated like wages, and excluded from the chapter 7 estate. It is fundamentally different than tax credits accrued prior to the bankruptcy petition, which in some cases can be property of the estate. Moreover, such payments are intended to benefit the debtor’s children. Many courts have held that child support payments are not property of the estate and are held for the benefit of the child. See, e.g., In re Palidora, 310 B.R. 164 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2004), following Boston v. Gardner, 365 F.2d 242 (9th Cir. 1966).