In Re Johnson, 454 B.R. 882

UST moves for summary judgment to dismiss the Debtor's Chapter 7 case under 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(2) based on a presumed abuse if the third vehicle expense is excluded.
Debtor Johnson owns three vehicles: a 2004 GMC Yukon, a 2007 Ford Mustang, and a 1998 Honda Accord; the Yukon and Mustang secure purchase-money liens and are used by the Debtor and his wife, while the Honda is used by the Debtor's oldest daughter and is owned free and clear.
Debtor's household includes three teenagers; the family relies on all three vehicles for work, school, and medical appointments, with the oldest daughter transporting her sisters as needed.
Form B22A reflects $496 monthly ownership for Yukon and Mustang and $239 per vehicle for operating costs on all three; an extra $200 operating expense is claimed for the Mustang due to age/mileage.
If the operating expense for the third car is allowed, Debtor's disposable income falls below the § 707(b)(2) abuse threshold; if disallowed, the presumption of abuse would arise and the case could be dismissed.
Court applies the Supreme Court's Lanning and Ransom framework to determine whether IRS guidelines permit a third-car operating expense in this context, concluding the guidelines provide flexibility to allow it given appropriate facts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the third vehicle's operating costs may be claimed under Local Standards	UST asserts only two cars may be covered by Local Standards.	Johnson contends IRS guidelines permit a third car if necessary for welfare or income production.	No summary judgment; third-car operating expense may be allowed.
Role of Lanning and Ransom in applying the means test to multiple cars	Ransom/Lanning do not permit a third-car deduction beyond two vehicles.	These decisions require considering individual circumstances and the IRS guidelines to determine applicability.	Means test must be applied to reflect individual circumstances; debate over three cars is permissible.
Whether IRS Collection Financial Standards provide flexibility to allow a third-car expense	Collections supports only two-car operating costs.	Collection Standards, together with the Financial Analysis Handbook and IRM, allow deviations or additional allowances when justified by facts.	IRS guidelines provide flexibility; denial of the Trustee's motion is appropriate pending evidentiary showing.

Ransom v. FIA Card Servs., N.A., 131 S. Ct. 716 (2011) (means test allowances tied to 'applicable' local standards; individualized inquiry required)
Hamilton v. Lanning, 130 S. Ct. 2464 (2010) (rejects mechanical treatment of disposable income; emphasizes debtor-specific facts)
In re Washburn, 579 F.3d 934 (8th Cir. 2009) (cases interpreting two-car limitation post-means test standards)
In re Hager, 447 B.R. 876 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2011) (discussion post-Ransom on two-car limits with three vehicles; distinguishable facts)
In re Predragovic, No. 10-60259, 2010 WL 3239360 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2010) (preference to standard IRS table amounts; not controlling for three-car issue)