Bankruptcy Loophole for Anti's

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 15, 2005
Messages
1,185
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
My son has had to declare bankruptcy due to the economic conditions and informs me that after turning his car in for repossesion, declaring and selling all his "assets;" that, his sole firearm, his handgun must be declared and sold!

Perhaps this would be understandable if he had an expensive collection with much value, but on the other hand it makes me suspicious that the grabbers have had this provision enacted into law here in my state (PA) as just another means to accomplish public disarmament by force of law.

How prevalent is this in our union?
 
Yeah, the BK laws are pretty difficult to "enforce". BKs hide their snowmobiles, their motorcycles, their various other assets with friends or family until the crap blows over, then get them back. The way that most of them do it is fraudulent, but there are legal ways to do it. Even the fraudsters get away with it most of the time, because only an individual, local, angry creditor will ever find the stuff and petition the BK court about it.
 
Personally, I'm having a hard time understanding why the gun should be exempt, if he's declaring bankruptcy.

If he really has no money then all of his assets should be liquidated. It's unfortunate but it's true.
 
I'm with Maelstrom. For all we know, the guy he bought the gun from is one of his creditors, who will now be forced to accept little or nothing for the debt.

Tim
 
Yeah, you can't blame asset repo on the anti's. A gun is just an asset. If the gun has meaning, sell it to a trusted friend or relative who can hold it for better times. Bear in mind that you may well need to turn around and forfeit the money which is why the $1 sale thing could be taken as bad faith. So let's say you have a trusted friend or relative who can't give you $750 for your Colt Python or whatever. Do a bill of sale anyway with that (or other reasonable amount) but be prepared to fork over $750 to the trustee yourself. The gun stays in the family and you will have, in good faith, done your part...they don't want a Colt Python, they want the value it represents.

Now, on the other hand, at least in Indiana, you can usually avoid a lot of asset forfeiture in most Bankruptcies. As noted, this fellow does not have a gun collection that would pay off his debts but basically, a bankruptcy is, while a legal matter, also a matter of negotiation. He may be able to have the firearm exempted from forfeiture if, for example, he makes a good faith cash substitute. Even in Bankruptcy, everything is ultimately negotiable.

No winners in a Bankruptcy.
 
Oregon Revised Statutes:

18.362 Exemption for firearms. Every citizen of this state above the age of 16 years shall be entitled to have, hold and keep, for the own use and defense of the citizen and shall have exempt from execution one rifle or shotgun and one pistol. The combined value of all firearms claimed as exempt under this section may not exceed $1,000

Yhis exemption is availble to Oregon residents filing bankruptcy. Additionally, most states have a catch all miscellanious exemption which can be applied to firearms:

18.345(1)(o) The debtor’s interest, not to exceed $400 in value, in any personal property. However, this exemption may not be used to increase the amount of any other exemption.
 
Its all only stuff---once he's free and clear there should be enough left over from his paychecks to purchase another one.
 
Give him $500 (and a receipt) for it. The $500 goes into the pot for paying his debts. Someday he can buy it back from you, or you can leave it to him in your will. (I'm assuming $500 is more than he would get a gun shop or an auction if they knew he was being forced to sell, but that's a wild guess)
 
If it's a really nice pistol that he really wants to keep, then do it legally and keep it in the family. If he could care less and will replace it some day with something that he would RATHER have, other than this particular one, then sell-away!
 
Wow, something good out of Oregon besides people who drive the speed limit.:banghead:

Nevada's and Utah's exemption laws allow retention of only one firearm, plus any National Guard/Reserve stuff you might have IF you are serving. However, I don't remember there being any dollar limit on the one shooter. Most of my clients with firearms have kept the $150.00 .38 revolver.

One long gun and one pistol--now that's a bit more sensible as far as I'm concerned.

It would be interesting to do a quick national survey and see whether anti states like MA and HI are like PA is reported to be.
 
Wow, there is an insane amount of incorrect information and bad advice in this thread. Do NOT follow it. Follow the advice of the lawyer ONLY! Only legaleagle and grump said anything which is completely correct and helpful.

First, what state does your son live in? The exemption statutes vary from state to state. Most states provide a certain amount of protection for guns. My state has an exemption of up to $2,000 worth which you can set aside and exempt from the bankruptcy process. You can choose which guns YOU want to put under the $2,000 umbrella (one or more). But in some states it's "one gun" meaning that you can protect a $100,000 H&H or Perazzi, OR a $50 Lorcin, your choice, but only ONE gun. Some states have no protection, but pre-BK exemption planning to maximize assets CAN be done if done in the right way (ask your lawyer), and there is enough TIME to get it done. It is however, certainly possible that what you suggest is true; that anti forces in the state legislature eliminated or prevented enactment of a gun exemption.

As mentioned, you might be able to shoehorn one or more guns into another exemption, such as the catchall $$ amount some states have, and tools of the trade if you're a police officer or security guard.

zxcvbob is almost there - if it's a fair market transaction (money actually received), it's insulated from avoidance, but the money needn't go to creditors; it can be spent on necessities prior to filing if there is time.

Also, the friend needn't buy it prior to filing necessarily; the friend can simply buy it from the BK trustee when the time comes, IF the time comes. Often the trustee will abandon low-value property items that they have a right to sell. Then no one is out any money and the gun is kept. Just depends on the value.
 
Last edited:
Update.

It would appear as though you may be right:

Here is title 42, section 8124 of PA statutes:

Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes
Judiciary and Judicial Procedure (Title 42)

§ 8124. Exemption of particular property.

(a) Goods.--The following personal property of the judgment debtor shall be exempt from attachment or execution on a judgment:
Wearing apparel.
Bibles and school books.
Sewing machines belonging to seamstresses or used and owned by private families, but not including sewing machines kept for sale or hire.
Uniforms and accoutrements (relating to exemption of uniforms and equipment).


(b) Retirement funds and accounts.--
Except as provided in paragraph (2), the following money or other property of the judgment debtor shall be exempt from attachment or execution on a judgment:
(i) Certain amounts payable under the Public School Employees' Retirement Code as provided by 24 Pa.C.S. § 8533 (relating to taxation, attachment and assignment of funds).
(ii) Certain amounts payable under the State Employees' Retirement Code as provided by 71 Pa.C.S. § 5953 (relating to taxation, attachment and assignment of funds).
(iii) The retirement allowance provided for in the act of May 24, 1893 (P.L.129, No.82).
(iv) Compensation or pension provided for in the act of May 20, 1915 (P.L.566, No.242).
(v) Compensation or pension provided for in the act of May 28, 1915 (P.L.596, No.259).
(vi) The retirement allowance, contributions and returned contributions . . . known as the "Pennsylvania Municipal Retirement Law."
(vii) Any pension or annuity, whether by way of a gratuity or otherwise, granted or paid by any private corporation or employer to a retired employee under a plan or contract which provides that the pension or annuity shall not be assignable.
(viii) Any retirement or annuity fund of any self-employed person (to the extent of payments thereto made while solvent, but not exceeding the amount actually excluded or deducted as retirement funding for Federal income tax purposes) and the appreciation thereon, the income therefrom and the benefits or annuity payable thereunder.
(ix) Any retirement or annuity fund provided for under section 401(a), 403(a) and (b), 408 or 409 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (Public Law 99-514, 26 U.S.C. § 401(a), 403(a) and (b), 408 or 409), the appreciation thereon, the income therefrom and the benefits or annuity payable thereunder and transfers and rollovers between such funds. This subparagraph shall not apply to:
(A) Amounts contributed by the debtor to the retirement or annuity fund within one year before the debtor filed for bankruptcy. This shall not include amounts directly rolled over from other funds which are exempt from attachment under this subparagraph.
(B) Amounts contributed by the debtor to the retirement or annuity fund in excess of $15,000 within a one-year period. This shall not include amounts directly rolled over form other funds which are exempt from attachment under this subparagraph.
(C) Amounts deemed to be fraudulent conveyances.


(c) Insurance proceeds.--The following property or other rights of the judgment debtor shall be exempt from attachment or execution on a judgment:

Certain amounts paid, provided or rendered by a fraternal benefit society as provided by 40 Pa.C.S. § 6531 (relating to benefits not attachable).
Claims and compensation payments under the act of June 2, 1915 (P.L.736, No.338), known as "The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Law," except as otherwise provided in the act.
Any policy or contract of insurance or annuity issued to a solvent insured who is the beneficiary thereof, except any part thereof exceeding an income or return of $100 per month.
Any amount of proceeds retained by the insurer at maturity or otherwise under the terms of an annuity or policy of life insurance if the policy or a supplemental agreement provides that such proceeds and the income therefrom shall not be assignable.
Any policy of group insurance or the proceeds thereof.
The net amount payable under any annuity contract or policy of life insurance made for the benefit of or assigned to the spouse, children or dependent relative of the insured, whether or not the right to change the named beneficiary is reserved by or permitted to the insured. The preceding sentence shall not be applicable to the extent the judgment debtor is such spouse, child or other relative.
The net amount payable under any accident or disability insurance.
Certain amounts paid, provided or rendered by a fraternal benefit society as provided by section 305 of the act of July 29, 1977 (P.L.105, No.38), known as the "Fraternal Benefit Society Code."
Certain amounts paid, provided or rendered under the provisions of section 106(f) of the act of July 19, 1974 (P.L.489, No.176), known as the "Pennsylvania No-fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act."
Certain amounts paid, provided or rendered under the provisions of section 703 of the act of December 5, 1936 (2nd Sp.Sess., 1937 P.L.2897, No.1), known as the "Unemployment Compensation Law."

So the only things under goods are wearing apparel, uniforms, books, and a sewing machine!!! :eek: That's the worst exemption set I've ever seen. Indeed that blows very very hard. Lobbying the state legislature for more exemptions is definitely in order.

Your son could move to another state with more favorable exemptions for at least 91 days, file bankruptcy in the new state taking advantage of the new state's exemption laws, then move back. If that's a possibility, you might check the surrounding state' exemption set. He'd actually have to move, however, for a little while.

So I guess to answer your question, this is NOT very prevalant in this country. That is an extremely creditor-favorable state. Many states have far more favorable exemption sets (more debtor-friendly), and many including specific ones for guns. Texas is arguable THE most debtor-friendly exemption set state in the country.
 
Perhaps this would be understandable if he had an expensive collection with much value, but on the other hand it makes me suspicious that the grabbers have had this provision enacted into law here in my state (PA) as just another means to accomplish public disarmament by force of law.

This is just nuts. This isn't a law by or for the antis or gun grabbers. The guns would not be taken and destroyed. They would be sold to other pro-gun people (so as to get the most from the assets) and hence NOT a loophole for the antis or the gun-grabbers. It would just keep the gun in circulation with other gun people.
 
"Your son could move to another state with more favorable exemptions for at least 91 days, file bankruptcy in the new state taking advantage of the new state's exemption laws, then move back."

Oh, please...

Tim
 
What do you mean "oh, please". Are you a bankruptcy lawyer, TIM RB? I'm not saying it's practical, but it is an option. It's not an appealing option unless a lot of money is at stake, or let's say, if he lives 5 miles from the border of NJ, WV, NY, OH, or VA. He could rent an apt just over the border for 91 days, and it could work. Oh wait, no, I take that back, it won't anymore - that would work up until Oct, 2005. Now it's 3 years before the exemption set of the new state applies. My bad.
I am also with Maelstrom You should buy it.

If you mean for $1 as Maelstrom suggested, then horrible, terrible advice. If you mean for fair market value as zvxbob suggested, then not too bad advice.
 
Last edited:
I think the "Oh Please" was, with all the guy is going through, he is going to move for 90 days and change everything to his new address.

It doesn't sound too realistic to me. Move and live where, in a tent?

I also suggested that dad buy the gun (at fair market price) and give the son a receipt showing the sale. That is, if the son wants the gun that much.
 
Wow, there is an insane amount of incorrect information and bad advice in this thread.

Indeed.

The OP’s son should have a lawyer handling his bankruptcy; that’s the only person he should consult in this matter.

The OP and his son may also not be understand the process – when my brother’s business failed he declared bankruptcy; he was allowed to keep his gun collection. As part of the process, a court-appointed appraiser reviewed the collection and established a value for the entire collection. He’s making payments over a specified period of time. According to his lawyer no one’s forced to surrender his non-exempt assets. He’s very happy to make the payments and keep his guns – much cheaper than replacing the entire collection; the creditors aren’t ‘happy’ but they’re getting more with the payments than they would get if my brother sold them at a pawn shop or the like and turn over the proceeds. The courts also don’t want to get involved in the acquisition and disposal of firearms.
 
I don't know anything about bankruptcy but in my opinion (which I have been told is worth jack), unless the gun is sentimental I'd sell it (which I have in the past, remington 870 wingmaster, rest in rust) Sounds like he can use the money more. I agree 100 percent with "jdc1244" to check with a lawyer. Everything expressed here are opinions unless there is a pro bono forum lawyer .

At the same time it depends on what kind of gun it is, If its in danger of being on Obama's Sh*t list then keep it. When Obama said we need change, I decided to get off my butt and buy my first 1911.

All politics aside tell your son good luck and just about everybody can relate to his situation in a way.
 
I agree...get a lawyer. You ask advice on the Internet, you get Internet advice.

I based my comment on a rough patch a few years ago (4 kids in college). I looked at Bankruptcy but that is not what it is cracked up to be...avoid it if possible.

So I was forced to sell a bunch of guns, some inherited, some I had bought. I just had to do it. Could afford to shoot them and couldn't afford to fix my car so, at that moment, it was pretty easy. I wish I had many back but I am past the rough patch. I was fortunate that the only gun with real sentimental value (my Dad's Browning SxS 12ga) I just kept...that and my Glock 17. I figured I could deal with what ever with a 12ga and a Glock...and I did.

I think the digest of this thread is, with good legal advice, some hope for your sone that a) he may be able to keep a gun, and b) if not, rough patches pass. Get him a lawyer, work out his priorities with him and life will go on. With the economy the way it is, it is looking like about 3 years before he'll get his hearing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top