Case Summary:
The chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the plan proposed by above-median income debtors. The debtors had proposed a plan of only 54 months in length. The trustee contended that the under § 325(b)(1)(B), the plan could only be confirmed if it met the terms of the “applicable commitment period,” which in the debtors’ case was 60 months. The debtors argued that the “projected disposable income” calculation and the applicable commitment period were not temporal requirements, but simply multipliers. Since their plan proposed to pay unsecured creditors the amount of money required by the projected disposable income calculation, they believed the temporal length of the plan did not matter. The Court ruled that while there is a logical basis for associating shorter plans with a greater likelihood of success, the statutory language dictated the result. The language of the statute is temporal in nature, and Congress clearly intended that above-median income debtors would be required to propose a 60-month plan term in the event of an objection by the trustee or unsecured creditors. The trustee’s objection was sustained.

Statute/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 1325 -- Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan

Key Terms:
Applicable Commitment Period
Confirmation of Chapter 13 Plan