BAPCPA – Page 2 – Rochester Bankruptcy and Debt Relief

Upcoming Changes to the Means Test

Once again, the means test figures for median income are changing as of March 15, 2011. In New York, it means that the amount of income that the debtor can have before being forced into a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy is going to increase.

Through March14, 2011, a single debtor in New York could have $45,548 in income in income and still be able to file Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. Starting March 15, 2011, that figure is increasing to $46,295. Similar increases will take place for all family sizes. The comparison of the existing and new income limits is below.

Old Income Limits

FAMILY SIZE

1 EARNER 2 PEOPLE 3 PEOPLE 4 PEOPLE *

$45,548 $56,845 $67,292 $82,587

New Income Limits

FAMILY SIZE

1 EARNER 2 PEOPLE 3 PEOPLE 4 PEOPLE *

$46,295 $57,777 $68,396 $83,942

* Add $7,500 for each individual in excess of 4.

While the increases are not large, they are an improvement on the last set of income limits. The reason for a slight growth in the median income is the decline in the American economy. Since the economy is down, employers do not give employees significant wages increases. As a result, the American median family income has grown only slightly, and means test figures increased only moderately.

If you are contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, New York, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Upcoming Changes In the Means Test

Once again, the means test figures for median income are changing as of November 1, 2010. Unfortunately, for a lot of jurisdictions it means that the amount of income that the debtor can have before being forced into a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy is going to decrease.

Through October 31, 2010, a single debtor in New York could have $46,320 in income and still be able to file Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. Starting November 1, 2010, that figure is dropping to $45,548. Similar declines will take place for all family sizes. The comparison of the existing and new income limits is below.

Old Income Limits

FAMILY SIZE

1 EARNER 2 PEOPLE 3 PEOPLE 4 PEOPLE *

$46,320 $57,902 $69,174 $82,164

New Income Limits

FAMILY SIZE

1 EARNER 2 PEOPLE 3 PEOPLE 4 PEOPLE *

$45,548 $56,845 $67,292 $82,587

* Add $7,500 for each individual in excess of 4.

While the income limit for a family of four has gone up slightly, for smaller families, the income limit has declined. For a family of three, the income limit will decline by nearly two thousand dollars.

The reason for a reduction in the median income is the decline in the American economy. Since the economy is down, employers pay less and employees earn less. As a result, the American median family income has dropped once again. As the income declined, so do the income limits for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. The unfortunate problem resulting from the recession is that as debtors make less money and have more financial problems, it becomes harder for them to qualify for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy.

Who Qualifies For Bankruptcy?

Do I qualify to file a bankruptcy? This is one of the most common questions I am asked as a bankruptcy lawyer when I meet with debtors who are hoping to obtain relief from their debts in bankruptcy court. My answer is usually yes, since almost everyone qualifies for bankruptcy under either Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code.

I think that this question is often asked because of common myths and misinformation that people hear with regard to what bankruptcy is and what it does for the debtor. Unfortunately, there is much misinformation being passed around. It is rare that someone would not qualify for a filing under either chapter of the Bankruptcy Code. If there are horror stories, they typically arise out of situations where someone did not disclose accurate information to the bankruptcy court.

In order to qualify for a bankruptcy relief, the debtor needs to have a reason to file. The primary reason for most debtors is their inability to pay their debts. Whether or not the debtor owns assets is not a a consideration in qualifying to file for bankruptcy. Under New York’s bankruptcy exemptions, a single filer can protect $50,000 in home equity, $2,400 of equity in the vehicle, and there are other exemptions available for other classes of assets.

There are no minimal requirement as to how much debt a debtor must have before filing, nor does this debt has to be reduced to a specific figure. Also, if you are filing Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, you are not limited with respect to the property that you can own, but the amount of property may be a factor in the amount of payments under the plan. While there are maximum limits of the amount of debt that can be discharged under either Chapter 7 or Chapter 13, the vast majority of debtors will not even approach them. In Chapter 7, there are no maximum debt limits. As a result, that Chapter 7 Bankruptcy is available to the debtors regardless of how much debt they owe, and its availability is only limited by the means test. In Chapter 13, you may not have more than $1,010,650 in secured debt and $336,900 in unsecured debt.

Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, Chapter 13 Bankruptcy and Immigration Status

Can my bankruptcy filing affect my immigration status? This is a question periodically asked by my clients. The answer to that question is actually depends on the particular circumstances of each case, but here are some of the issues that may be relevant.

There is no immigration law, statute, or regulation that specifically forbids individuals who have filed for bankruptcy from applying for naturalization. Additionally, there is no specific question on Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, related to bankruptcy. However, the debtor’s immigration status can be affected if he has not filed required tax returns or if he owes money to the IRS.

While reviewing immigration-related applications, the INS is usually checking to see if an individual seeking naturalization has evidence of “poor moral character” which could be grounds to deny an application. The filing of a bankruptcy petition as a consequence of financial hardship clearly does not rise to the level of “poor moral character.”

However, if you are facing any type of immigration issue and are about to file for either Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, you should disclose that fact to your bankruptcy lawyer at your initial consultation as well as discuss your potential bankruptcy filing with your immigration attorney.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, New York, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Do Divorce Settlements Survive Bankruptcy?

I have previously written about interplay between divorce, family court proceedings and bankruptcy, as well as other issues involving interplay between bankruptcy and family law. One issue that is highly significant in situations where one of the former spouses is about to file a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy is whether the bankruptcy trusee will seek to undo a divorce settlement agreement.

With bankruptcy filings being so common, and divorce being a major reason for seeking bankruptcy relief, divorce lawyers are frequently concerned as to whether a divorce settlement will be upheld in a bankruptcy proceeding.

There are valid reasons to be cautious since if a debtor transfers a valuable asset to a spouse (or soon-to-be ex-spouse) prior to filing for bankruptcy, and the debtor-spouse does not receive reasonable value in return, then the transfer may be deemed to be a “fraudulent transfer.” In such a case, the bankruptcy trustee can sue the person who received the asset to recover it for the bankruptcy estate, so that all creditors can share in its value. As with any other situations involving fraudulent transfers, the debtor must have been insolvent at the time of transfer.

In order to demonstrate that a transfer was not a fraudulent transfer, the party who received the transfer would have to show that there was “reasonably equivalent value.” It is common for a divorcing spouse to settle the divorce case by giving the other spouse valuable assets such as an interest in real estate, bank accounts, investments, or other personal property. In those situations, both parties do not want a bankruptcy trustee to try to set such transfers aside.

There was a time when some of the bankruptcy courts have held that innocent spouses who received such a transfer were no different from any other party who received a large transfer without sufficient consideration. However, a case decided by the United States Circuit Court of Appeals in June of 2009 will give many divorcing spouses a greater degree of certainty that a trustee will not be able to set aside a divorce settlement.

The decision in Bledsoe v. Bledsoe, 569 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2009) this issue by addressing when a bankruptcy court may avoid a transfer made pursuant to a state-court divorce decree. The Circuit Court affirmed that decision and held that a trustee can only set aside a matrimonial settlement if he alleges and proves “extrinsic fraud.” The Court also held that a divorce decree that follows from a regularly conducted, contested divorce proceeding conclusively establishes “reasonably equivalent value” in the absence of fraud or collusion. Since the Second Circuit has not addressed this issue, Bledsoe is valid law in the bankruptcy courts in New York. At the same time, the bankruptcy court, here in Rochester, New York, and elsewhere, will always review the totality of the facts.

In order for a divorce settlement to be upheld by the bankruptcy court, it must be ratified by the matrimonial court. That means that any transfer should be accurately described in a stipulation of settlement. In addition, the stipulation must be specifically referred to and incorporated in the judgment of divorce. It is not enough that the parties merely stipulate to a settlement; the court must specifically approve the settlement. In a typical judgment of divorce, this is accomplished by stating that the stipulation survives the judgment of divorce and is not merged into it.

Should You Hire a Bankruptcy Lawyer?

Some of the major reasons why people who know they need to file for bankruptcy, but postpone doing so, is fears about filing either Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, and concern about paying the legal fees.

Some debtors consider filing bankruptcy on their own. However, this can be a major mistake and can create additional problems. As I have written about previously, bankruptcy involves a number of procedural and substantive steps and tests that have to be satisfied before the bankruptcy court can grant a discharge.

In both Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy cases, the debtor must appear before a court-appointed trustee for a 341 hearing. The bankruptcy trustee who conducts the hearing is not someone who is there to help the debtor. His role is just the opposite. The trustee is charged with investigating the debtor and his financial circumstances to determine if there are any assets available for thee benefit of creditors. Meeting with an experienced bankruptcy attorney will enable the debtor to have his or her financial situation reviewed and assets protected in advance to the extent possible.

What debtors may not realize is that certain types of financial transactions that may have taken place years before filing can have a major impact on the debtor’s bankruptcy. For example, if any significant assets were given away or if real estate was transferred, this may amount to what is known as a fraudulent conveyance or a preference, and may result in significant litigation in the bankruptcy case. Usually, a bankruptcy lawyer will review these issues before a bankruptcy petition is filed in order to mitigate the risk.

While the bankruptcy petition is written in plain English, it is a difficult document to prepare for someone who is not familiar with the Bankruptcy Code. A complete petition in a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in New York, including all of the various forms and schedules runs in excess of 40 pages. The petition requires preparing numerous schedules and budgets. The debtor must list appropriate information about his debts, assets, income and expenses.

The Statement of Financial Affairs includes numerous questions that must be answered. All of the debtor’s creditors must be listed not only in a schedule of debts (segregated in three separate categories) but also in a special format called a Matrix. Such listing must include creditors’ names, addresses, account numbers, dates when any debts were incurred and their purpose.

When Congress passed BAPCPA in 2005, it imposed many new requirements. The most significant of those requirements is a complex and complicated means test, as well as the requirement for mandatory credit counseling. The Chapter 7 trustee as well as the Office of the U.S. Trustee reviews each and every petition to make sure all of the requirements under the new law are properly met. The means test is complicated, and the debtor’s failure to properly prepare the bankruptcy means test can create significant problems as the United States Trustee can seek to have the bankruptcy case dismissed.

The debtor must also choose which Chapter of bankruptcy to file. If a debtor is seeking to stop foreclosure and cure mortgage arrears, a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy filing won’t be helpful. At the same time, a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy filing is likely to result in a 3-5 years payment plan.

There are self-help books that explain how a debtor can prepare and file his petition and complete the process. However, there are many traps for the unwary that even attorneys who do not regularly practice bankruptcy often create problems for their clients.

Every bankruptcy trustee I know in Rochester, New York, has expressed concern about those debtors who file bankruptcy without an attorney because these debtors often make serious procedural and substantive mistakes. Self-representation by pro-se debtors in bankruptcy matters can end up being a mistake, and result in further financial problems for the debtor.

Chapter 13 Bankruptcy and Projected Disposable Income

In order to confirm a plan in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, unless creditors are paid in full, the debtor must pay to unsecured creditors his or her “projected disposable income” expected to be received in an “applicable commitment period”, either 36 or 60 months depending on the Chapter 13 plan. Since the enactment of 2005 BAPCPA, there has been a dispute over what “projected disposable income” meant. A recent decision of the United States Supreme Court has resolved that issue, at least partially.

In Hamilton v. Lanning, decided on June 7, 2010, the Supreme Court held that “when a bankruptcy court calculates a debtor’s projected disposable income, the court may account for changes in the debtor’s income or expenses that are known or virtually certain at the time of confirmation.” In other words, rather than simply applying the calculation of “current monthly income,” which looks at the debtor’s income for the 6 calendar months before the filing of the petition, the court may consider changes in income that have occurred, or are expected to occur, or virtually certain to occur at the time of confirmation.

In Lanning, the debtor had received a termination buyout from her former employer which, when included in “current monthly income,” dramatically increased her income over what she was really making, and the mechanical application of current monthly income approach would have resulted in her having to pay more into the plan than she possibly could afford. Because after the buyout she was making wages well below the state median income, the Supreme Court held that this change in income could be considered in calculating her “projected disposable income.”

While being practical and understandable, this “forward looking” approach should not give the bankruptcy court or the bankruptcy trustee, or the debtor, an opportunity to make unsubstantiated claims. The Supreme Court stated that “a court taking the forward-looking approach should begin by calculating disposable income, and in most cases, nothing more is required. It is only in unusual cases that a court may go further and take into account other known or virtually certain information about the debtor’s future income or expenses.”

While the debtor’s expenses as included in the “projected disposable income” were not specifically before the Court, the opinion stated that the court may consider changes in income or expenses when calculating projected disposable income. In Lanning, the Supreme Court stated that what is required is a “change” in income or expenses, not a discrepancy between the expenses allowed on the “means test” and the debtor’s actual expenses. As I previously discussed, debtors whose “current monthly income” is above the state median, many expenses are determined based on fixed allowances, not on what the debtor’s actual expenses are. For example, the food and related items allowance (set by the IRS) is $1,000 for the debtor’s household size, but the debtor only spends $500 on these items, he or she can claim the full allowance in calculating “projected disposable income.” Under the statute, the bankruptcy trustee is not be allowed to recapture that difference, and require that it be paid to creditors. Conversely, if the debtor spends $2,000, he can still only claim the allowance. As a result, for many debtors, the fixed “means test” numbers result in a more favorable result than their real expenses as stated on Schedules I and J. Because the difference between the means test expenses and expenses reported on Schedule J, Lanning does not change the existing differences between them.

At the same time, under Lanning, the debtor may be disadvantages if the debtor is disallowed a deduction for secured debt payments where property is being surrendered or perhaps where liens are being stripped down or off. Under Lanning, such change in the debt payments may be seen as “change” in expenses. However, unless there is a “change” in those secured debt expenses that are allowed as real figures on the means test, the means test expenses will remain the same.

Means Test – Inclusions and Exclusions

In a typical Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, the most significant hurdle that the debtor has to overcome is the means test.

The 2005 amendments to the bankruptcy code created a new Means Test. The main purpose of this test is to a) determine if an individual is eligible to file a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy and b) to determine the disposable income of a Chapter 13 debtor who is above the median income.

In order to determine eligibility to file Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, the means test is calculated by entering the debtor’s income figures for the prior six months into form B22 of the bankruptcy petition. If the debtor is below median income, no further steps need be taken and the debtor is presumed to be able to file Chapter 7.

If the debtor is above median income, further sections of form B22 must be filled out. The debtor’s estimated monthly income (based on the prior 6 months) is calculated and deductions are made using both IRS standards (for most living expenses) and some of the debtor’s actual expenses (including secured debt payments and health expenses).

If, after these deductions, it is determined that the debtor has minimal or no monthly disposable income, the means test is satisfied and the debtor is presumed eligible to file Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. If the debtor fails the means test, he or she is presumed ineligible to file Chapter 7, and absent special circumstances warranting an exception, must seek relief under another chapter of the code, typically, Chapter 13 Bankruptcy.

In order to determine disposable income in a Chapter 13 case, the Means Test is conducted much the same way as in a Chapter 7 case. If the debtor is below median income, the remaining sections if form B22 need not be filled out and the debtor’s disposable income will be based on his or her actual income and expenses at the time the petition is filed. If the debtor is above-median income, the remaining steps of the means test are performed and disposable income is the figure reached through the above-described means test calculation. In many instances the figure yielded by the means test will be close to what the debtor pays every month over the life of the Chapter 13 plan.

What is also critical is what income is included within the definition of income. Initially, the spouse’s income may be included, even if the spouse is not filing bankruptcy. If you are receiving support in your household from your spouse, then you’re supposed to have that income available for your creditors even if you don’t earn actually that income.

Another issue which comes up fairly often is income received from sources other than work. Some sources of “other income” could include: interest, dividends, pension income, bonus payments, child support, alimony or maintenance payments, disability payments under workers compensation or private insurance. Some other sources of income to the family which may or may not be income include: withdrawals from IRA and 401k plan, income tax refunds.

Some sources of revenue are not income for purposes of the means test: social security payments received by the filer or his/her spouse, unemployment benefits, certain types of income received by the members of the National Guard or Armed Forces Reserve.

Social Security income: Means testing does not consider social security as income. Accordingly, someone with $2,000.00 per month social security income will pass the means test even if expenses are only $1,000 and $1,000 is left over to pay creditors on the means test. Social Security Income includes both Social Security Disability (“SSD”) as well as Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) payments. Social Security income may be received by children in the household as survivor benefits in a situation where one of the parents has died. Despite the fact that those benefits can be substantial, U.S. Trustee’s Office advises that that survivor benefits income is not to be included in the means test, despite the fact that, in most situations, such income is used to pay household expenses.

The National Guard and Reservists Relief Debt Act of 2008 applies to certain members of the National Guard and reserve components of the Armed Forces. If you are a member of the National Guard Member or Armed Forces Reserve, then you will be temporarily excluded from the means test for entire time you are on active duty and 540 days thereafter, provided you serve at least 90 days. If your duty is less than 90 days, you do not qualify. If you are active member of the active duty military, you do not qualify.

Another important exception applies to the situations where the debtor has primarily non-consumer debt. If the debtor’s debt is primarily non-consumer debt, then means test does not apply. Accordingly, someone making $10,000 per month with primarily business debts, still qualifies for Chapter 7 relief and discharge.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

What Happens If a Creditor Is Omitted In Chapter 7 Bankruptcy

When I prepare a bankruptcy petition in either Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, I do everything possible to make sure that every creditor is included and given a proper notice of the filing. However, once in a while, a Chapter 7 debtor realizes that he or she forgot to include a creditor after the case has closed.

If you are a bankruptcy lawyer, this occurs periodically. I file a routine Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition, the case goes proceeds normally, the debtor gets a discharge, and, subsequently, the case is closed. Then, sometime later, the debtor contacts me to say that a creditor was inadvertently omitted. The debtor explains that that he simply forgot and that it was an innocent mistake. A bankruptcy lawyer may think that this should not be a big problem since the case can be reopened by motion, and an application can be brought to amend the schedule of creditors to include the omitted one.

However, there have been a great number of cases on this issue, with divergent theories and conclusions. Some have held that the case can be reopened, and some have held that it can’t. Some bankruptcy courts routinely grant debtors’ motions to amend schedules to list previously omitted creditors. Some cases focus on whether there is prejudice to creditors or whether there was fraud.

Some courts will refuse to permit the case to be reopened, because they believe omitted debts are non-dischargeable. Yet other courts will refuse to permit the case to be reopened because they believe that omitted debts are automatically discharged even if they are not listed, and therefore reopening the case serves no purpose.

There are two possible approaches that courts can take in addressing this issue. Under the “mechanical approach” courts have denied motions to reopen no-asset cases, finding that the debt owed to an omitted creditor is discharged “as a matter of law.” Under this approach, there is no reason to reopen a bankruptcy case, provided that it is a no-asset case and the debt is not otherwise excepted from discharge.

Under the “equitable approach,” courts consider whether the debtor’s omission was the result of fraud, recklessness or intentional design, or if it would prejudice the creditor’s rights. Good faith is an important element. Courts adopting this approach have held that motions to reopen no-asset cases to list omitted creditors should be liberally granted.

For most garden variety situations where the debtor omits a typical credit card debt and advises the attorney within a few years, the courts will probably be unwilling to permit counsel to reopen the case to add the creditor, asserting that, under the mechanical approach, the debt is dischargeable. In such cases, the bankruptcy attorney should consider sending a certified letter to the creditor stating that the debt has been discharged, together with copies of the notice of commencement and order of discharge.

However, in situations where the creditor raises objections to this approach, the bankruptcy lawyer should be prepared to file a motion to reopen, in which case the court will probably consider the various factors in the equitable approach.

Bankruptcy and Personal Injury Lawsuits

Periodically I meet with debtors who either have a personal injury law suit pending, or may have a potential personal injury case. Personal injury lawsuit issues can complicate a bankruptcy since there are limitations on the debtor’s ability to receive a personal injury award, as well as different procedural hurdles imposed by the bankruptcy code.

Initially, personal injury lawsuits and causes of action are assets of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy estate. Under New York’s bankruptcy exemptions, the debtor can exempt the first $7,500 in net proceeds, but anything over and above that belongs to the bankruptcy estate and would be administered by the bankruptcy trustee. Since personal injury lawsuit or causes of action are assets, it is critical that the bankruptcy lawyer includes the debtor’s personal injury lawsuit or cause of action in the bankruptcy petition. If the debtor fails to include a potential cause of action in the bankruptcy petition, that may cause a dismissal of the personal injury action. According to New York cases, if a plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit filed a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy petition but failed to list a potential cause of action for personal injuries, then the plaintiff lacks standing to bring the personal injury action.

If the personal injury case or cause of action is included in the petition, the bankruptcy trustee will decide whether the case is valuable enough to administer. The bankruptcy lawyer is expected to provide the trustee with copies of the pleadings. Most trustees will consider the right to sue for a relatively small injury as being of “inconsequential value to the bankruptcy estate” and may decide to abandon the trustee’s interest in the cause of action. Generally, if a personal injury case will not result in any significant non-exempt recovery, then the trustee will not care about administering it. If the trustee determines that the case has value in excess of the exemption, he may want to administer the personal injury claim as an asset of the bankruptcy estate.

The Bankruptcy Code requires that all attorneys who render services to a debtor must be approved by the court. A trustee may employ as special counsel under a contingency fee arrangement, any attorney who has represented the debtor in pre-petition litigation, when it is in the best interests of the bankruptcy estate and the attorney has no interest adverse to that of the debtor or the estate. Theoretically, the trustee can hire any attorney of the trustee’s choosing to represent the debtor in the personal injury lawsuit, and can even take the case away from the existing personal injury attorney.

The automatic bankruptcy stay imposed by Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code does not stay any actions brought by the debtor. The automatic stay only acts to stay actions brought against the debtor including cross-claims, counter-claims and third-party claims.

The greatest unknown in a personal injury case filed by the bankruptcy debtor, is what interest the bankruptcy trustee will take in the case. Debtor’s bankruptcy attorney would do well to contact the trustee at the earliest opportunity to get an idea of the trustee’s intentions with respect to the personal injury lawsuit.