Confirmed Ch. 13 Plan Partially Binds IRS In re Swanson (N.D.Ill. 2004) This cause is before the Court on the Objection to Proof of Claim of the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") filed by Lydia S. Meyer, standing Chapter 13 Trustee ("Trustee"). Trustee objects to the Proof of Claim on the basis that it indicates that the claim is partially secured even though the confirmed Plan provides for payment as an unsecured priority claim. Because the Proof of Claim is contrary to the treatment of the claim provided in the Plan, the Trustee asserts that the confirmed Plan fixes the value of the secured claim at zero and extinguishes the IRS' lien. For the reasons set forth below, the Trustee's Objection to the Proof of Claim is overruled. The IRS filed a response in opposition to the Trustee's objection and a Cross-Motion to Vacate or Revoke Confirmation Order. For the reasons set forth below, the IRS's cross-motion is denied. Thus, the question to be resolved is whether the IRS is bound by the Amended Plan or whether its claim is controlled by its Proof of Claim. Relief from a confirmation order brought pursuant to Federal Rule 60 can be granted only when a party has been deprived of a constitutional right. Accordingly, the IRS must demonstrate that notice was constitutionally inadequate to get relief from the Confirmation Order pursuant to Federal Rule 60. Because the Amended Plan does not treat the IRS claim as secured, despite the fact that a tax lien exists, the Amended Plan and Confirmation Order do not affect that lien. However the IRS is still bound by the treatment of its claim as set forth in the Amended Plan and will receive its payments accordingly. _____________________ Business Debtor Must Maintain Appropriate Records In re Jacobowitz, 309 B.R. 429 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) One objecting to discharge under §727(a)(3) is required to show only that a Debtor's records are not reasonable in light of the circumstances, not that the Debtor actually failed to keep records to deceive its Creditors, See Goldstein, 123 B.R. at 525-26: Harman v. Brown (In re Brown), 56 B.R. 63, 66 (D.N.H.1985). The purpose of this section is to allow a determination of whether the Debtor is indeed "honest." When the Debtor fails to keep records pertaining to his business income and expenses, it is impossible for creditors to formulate any objections to discharge, and the Debtor's failure to keep such records cannot be used to his own advantage.