From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

National Collection Agency, Inc. v. Trahan

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 30, 1980
624 F.2d 906 (9th Cir. 1980)

Summary

holding a statutory exception for tax debts is preempted by the Bankruptcy Code

Summary of this case from In re Nation

Opinion

No. 78-3013.

Argued and Submitted July 8, 1980.

Decided July 30, 1980.

Harold B. Green, Los Angeles, Cal., Joseph H. Inglese, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.

Robert Barton, Barton Barton, Oakland, Cal., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

Before WRIGHT, KENNEDY, and HUG, Circuit Judges.


National appeals from a judgment declaring Trahan's debt to National dischargeable in bankruptcy. We affirm.

FACTS

Trahan was required by the State of California to give security ensuring his payment of sales tax. A surety contracted with Trahan to meet the requirement by posting a $2,000 bond with the State. After Trahan failed to pay the tax, National, the surety's assignee, brought a state court action against Trahan to recover the $2,000 the surety had paid to the State.

Trahan petitioned for voluntary bankruptcy and subsequently sought a declaration from the bankruptcy court that the debt to National was discharged in the bankruptcy proceeding. The district court affirmed the bankruptcy judge's finding that the debt was discharged.

DISCUSSION

There is an exception to dischargeability for tax debts owed by a bankrupt to government entities. The question is whether this exception applies to a debt owed to a surety which has paid the tax debt of a bankrupt.

At that time this action arose, the rule and its exception were found in 11 U.S.C. § 35, which provided in pertinent part:

(a) A discharge in bankruptcy shall release a bankrupt from all of his provable debts, whether allowable in full or in part, except such as (1) are taxes which became legally due and owing by the bankrupt to the United States or to any State or any subdivision thereof within three years preceding bankruptcy. . . .

The exception appears in altered form in the new statute, which does not have retroactive applicability. See 11 U.S.C. § 523.

National contends that it has a right under California surety law to enforce every remedy that the state would have had against Trahan. National concludes that, because Trahan's debt to the state was nondischargeable, the debt owed to National could not be discharged.

A state law that is contrary to federal bankruptcy law must yield. See Elliot v. Bumb, 356 F.2d 749, 755 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 829, 87 S.Ct. 67, 17 L.Ed.2d 66 (1966); In re Professional Bar Co., 537 F.2d 339, 340 (9th Cir. 1976) (per curiam). Assuming National's interpretation of California law is correct, that law does not control if it conflicts with Bankruptcy Act policy.

The statutory exception for tax debts runs counter to the general policy of the Bankruptcy Act favoring discharge of debts and the resulting fresh start it provides to debtors. See generally Perez v. Campbell, 402 U.S. 637, 648, 91 S.Ct. 1704, 1710, 29 L.Ed.2d 233 (1971). It furthers, however, the overriding need to assure tax collection by government entities.

Interpreting 11 U.S.C. § 35 broadly to include debts owed to a surety would not promote the collection of taxes because the state is paid by the surety whether or not the bankrupt's subsequent debt to the surety is nondischargeable. We conclude that any state statutory right that National might have to recover against Trahan would conflict with the federal bankruptcy policy favoring the discharge of debts.

Trahan was required by the State to post either cash or bond in order to conduct business. Making the debts dischargeable and, arguably, increasing the cost of contracting with sureties would not decrease the likelihood that tax debts are paid.

National also contends that under the doctrine of equitable subrogation it stands in place of the state and is subrogated to the nondischargeable quality of the state's claim. Such an approach was adopted under similar facts in Gilbert v. United States Fidelity Guaranty Co., 180 F. Supp. 794 (M.D.Ga. 1959), aff'd, 274 F.2d 823 (5th Cir. 1960). St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Donaldson, 225 S.C. 476, 83 S.E.2d 159 (1954). In light of the overriding policy favoring dischargeability, we reject the approach taken in Gilbert and Donaldson, decline to apply the doctrine of equitable subrogation, and hold that the debt owed to National was discharged.

Collier states ambiguously that under former 11 U.S.C. § 35, "subrogation of the non-dischargeable aspect of a tax claim was possible." 3 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 523.06, at 523-26 (15th ed. 1979). Collier cites Gilbert but does not discuss or approve its rationale.

We note that under the nonretroactive 1979 amendments to the Bankruptcy Act, one who is subrogated to a claim for failure to pay sales tax is not subrogated to the priority of the claim. 11 U.S.C. § 507(d).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

National Collection Agency, Inc. v. Trahan

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 30, 1980
624 F.2d 906 (9th Cir. 1980)

holding a statutory exception for tax debts is preempted by the Bankruptcy Code

Summary of this case from In re Nation

holding debt to be dischargeable under the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 since exception to discharge undermines the "fresh start" afforded by a discharge in bankruptcy

Summary of this case from In re Alloway

reaching opposite result under Bankruptcy Act

Summary of this case from In re Menna

In Trahan, the plaintiff surety posted a bond with the State of California, the obligee, to secure the defendant's payment of state sales tax.

Summary of this case from Am. S. Ins. Co. v. DLM, LLC

In Trahan, the court had to wrestle with the question of subrogation based on state created rights without any direction from federal Bankruptcy law. Now that the Code specifically provides for subrogation, there is no need to resort to state created rights and, accordingly, Trahan becomes irrelevant in such cases.

Summary of this case from In re Richardson

In Trahan, a surety contracted with Trahan to provide a bond to the State of California as security to ensure payment of sales tax. After Trahan failed to pay the tax, the assignee of the surety brought an action against Trahan in state court to recover the monies paid by the surety.

Summary of this case from In re Tooks

In Trahan, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the debt owed to the surety was discharged in bankruptcy even though the surety had paid the tax debt of the debtor.

Summary of this case from In re Tooks

In Trahan, a surety contracted with Trahan to provide a bond to the State of California as security to ensure payment of sales tax. After Trahan failed to pay the tax, the assignee of the surety brought an action against Trahan in State Court to recover the monies paid by the surety.

Summary of this case from In re Flick

In Trahan, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the debt owed to the surety was discharged in bankruptcy even though the surety had paid the tax debt of the debtor.

Summary of this case from In re Flick

In National Collection Agency, Inc. v. Trahan, 624 F.2d 906 (9th Cir. 1980), however, the court held the debt owed to a tax subrogee is discharged, rejecting Gillbert and St. Paul, but this Court declines to follow the holding of the Ninth Circuit and agrees with the greater weight of authority.

Summary of this case from In re Woerner
Case details for

National Collection Agency, Inc. v. Trahan

Case Details

Full title:THE NATIONAL COLLECTION AGENCY, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. KENNETH…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 30, 1980

Citations

624 F.2d 906 (9th Cir. 1980)

Citing Cases

In re Tooks

        Debtor seeks summary judgment on the grounds that the State Bar is a mere equitable subrogee of the…

In re Tooks

III DISCUSSION Debtor seeks summary judgment on the grounds that the State Bar is a mere equitable subrogee…