As one bankruptcy court recently stated when confronted with the same situation, “[w]hat then?” In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890, 897 (Bankr.N.D.Tex.2011). In resolving this issue, the court in Salazar acknowledged Moore's approach—an evidentiary hearing wherein the debtor must demonstrate a plausible basis for the claim of 100% of FMV—and then offered another tack:
As cited by this Court in its Supplemental Memorandum Opinion that is the subject of this appeal, a contrary decision was issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court of the Northern District of Texas. In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2011). An earlier decision by the Northern District of Texas is largely consistent with this Court's decision. In re Moore, 442 B.R. 865 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2010). Moore and Salazar were each issued after Schwab, but before the new Official Form 106. Because there are conflicting decisions, even within this Circuit, the Court finds that certification is appropriate under this subsection.
Credit Union (In re Herter), 456 B.R. 455, 466 (Bankr.D.Idaho 2011); In re Wiczek, 452 B.R. 762, 766 (Bankr.D.Minn.2011); In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890, 899 (Bankr.N.D.Tex.2011); see also In re Massey, No. 41059–MSH, Order on Mot. to Recons. (Bankr. D. Mass. Aug. 1, 2011).
); In re Hernandez, No. 10–01762, 2012 WL 2202931, at *3 (Bankr.D.P.R. June 14, 2012); In re Luckham, 464 B.R. 67, 77 (Bankr.D.Mass.2012); In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890, 897 (Bankr.N.D.Tex.2011), In re Stoney, 445 B.R. 543, 552 (Bankr.E.D.Va.2011); In re Winchell, No. 10–05827, 2010 WL 5338054, at *1–2 (Bankr.E.D.Wash.
Id. at 722. The Massey court adopted the analysis in In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890 (Bankr. N.D.Tx. 2011), where the court posed two possible solutions to dealing with this type of claimed exemptions. First, the court could hold an evidentiary hearing on the value of the debtor's exemptions.
Id. at 722. The Massey Panel adopted the analysis in In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890 (Bankr. N.D.Tx. 2011), where the court posed two possible solutions to dealing with this type of claimed exemptions. First, the court may hold an evidentiary hearing on the value of the debtor's exemptions.
Id. at 722. The Massey court adopted the analysis in In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890 (Bankr. N.D.Tx. 2011), where the court posed two possible solutions to dealing with this type of claimed exemptions. First, the court may hold an evidentiary hearing on the value of the debtor's exemptions.
Id. at 722. The Massey court adopted the analysis in In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890 (Bankr.N.D.Tx.2011), where the court posed two possible solutions to dealing with this type of claimed exemptions. First, the court may hold an evidentiary hearing on the value of the debtor's exemptions.
Where the debtor exempts '"100% of FMV,' the debtor is stating that regardless the value in-fact at any time, he is asserting such full value as his exempt interest." In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890, 897 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2011). "Such a declaration will encourage the trustee to object promptly to the exemption if he wishes to challenge it and preserve for the estate any value in the asset beyond relevant statutory limits. If the trustee fails to object, or if the trustee objects and the objection is overruled, the debtor will be entitled to exclude the full value of the asset.
Accordingly, “[t]he estate does not relinquish property until the bankruptcy case is closed or the estate abandons the property under 11 U.S.C. § 554.” Gebhart, 621 F.3d at 1212;see also In re Salazar, 449 B.R. 890, 898–99 (Bankr.N.D.Tex.2011) (various property); In re Evenson, No. 05–37920–svk, 2010 WL 4622188, at *3 (Bankr.E.D.Wis. Nov. 3, 2010) (a homestead and agricultural land). To the extent property may be worth more than the amount declared as its fair market value at the time a debtor's bankruptcy petition was filed, the estate is entitled to the current fair market value of that property, less the fair market value of the property when the bankruptcy petition was filed.