He won't off himself because he's a spiteful little turd. If he does we should commission a gravestone for him and hold a funeral. The gravestone should say something like this: "Here lies Phil with oddly shaped head. He did nothing wrong, he did everything correct." At his funeral tractors should be T-posing, swaying and snorting in unison to show respect before tipping his casket into the grave.
imagine being in a graveyard, when you stumble on a funeral
Because he's a windbag who loves to just string words together to make himself feel like a big boy. The call cut out slightly so what he said when asked about tips was "to my understanding, as per MY TAX ATTORNEY, they are not exempt" but the call cut out so what's on the recording is "to my understanding, as per MY TAX ATTORNEY, they are n- -xempt", he then went on to illustrate that his tips are considered regular income like what a waiter earns, he just added a bunch of pre-stream nonsense because he was sweating bullets at that point from all the questions.
This is what the gay ops "citibank" guy was trying to get at, but he failed to cite the right form. So Phil and Rochelle just derailed his interjection towards the "expenses" section of the other form (his personal expenses, groceries, mortgage, etc).
Yeah up until now the trustee just seems to take this net income at face value and isn't questioning his business expenses at all (or maybe she missed it too that those are different but similar values in the 5k range?). I can't blame her, pigroach's attempt at filling these forms is extremely confusing, but I hope someone brings this to her attention. It's also strange that he has to justify all his personal expenses (itemized list) and in regards to the business expenses he just can throw a number into a field. Sure, this is his personal (not business) bankruptcy, but in the case of a sole proprietorship this seems like a giant loophole.
I'm 100% certain that if DSP had to look at a case like this he'd call it a scam. It is such an idiotic thing to suggest he has $5,000 per month on business expenses, when his business is just sitting on a couch and streaming. Even a boomer who has no idea what streaming is would catch on to this. I don't know if he thought he was filing his documents for Sidella or superblindman to read, but this is straight up making fun of the system and Nancy should squeeze every last penny off of this dude.
From what I gathered from the way the question was asked, she wants the last 6 months like february 2020 and the 5 preceding months to that. She is likely doing due diligence to make sure his income is what he says it is, and discretionary spending not going to his collatoralized debts (CT condo) or his credit cards, if he had the money to pay what he owes on those things, but wasted it on frivolous things, seems less likely to qualify for bankruptcy.
He has the Beggars Nose!
Where you are going is he easily violated 3 through 5 so far.To do that, she would have to completely ignore his likely bogus "business expenses" and potentially fraudulent tax filings while also challenging just his WA condo valuation so that he can just barely hit the Chapter 7 income requirements while also having his WA condo not be covered by the exemption. And then there's the question of which part of the money her percentage actually comes from: is it the entire sale price of the WA condo, or is it whatever remains after the WA mortgage (and CT condo deficiency?) is paid off and Phil gets his $125,000 from the WA exemption.
If it's the latter, there is no reason for her to even bother with it. I guess I'm not seeing why she would risk her career, given that a judge is going to look at this too, over maybe $20,000. She gets guaranteed money for however many tens or hundreds of bankruptcies roll through with an occasional bump from liquidations. I get your point about dismissing the bankruptcy completely not being her best financial decision, but check the role of a trustee here and when debt shouldn't be discharged in Section J (as Chapter 7 would allow): https://www.justice.gov/ust/handbook-chapter-7-trustees
Section 727(a) provides that the court shall grant a discharge unless the debtor:
2. conceals property with intent to defraud;
3. fails to preserve or conceals financial records;
4. makes a false oath or account; presents or uses a false claim; gives, offers, receives money, property, or advantage for acting or forbearing to act; or withholds books and records;
5. fails to explain satisfactorily the loss or deficiency of assets;
I'm not even sure where I'm going with this. We'll see what happens
His biz expenses are absolute bullshit and why he kept avoiding answering.
He was suppose to have his tax return available for this meeting. He's known about that for at least a month. Him not having it raises some flags.
That makes a lot of sense, considering they don't show up anywhere else. As you said, it's completely ridiculous, to claim all of his credit lines as business expenses - if that's what he's been doing.
