In re White, 393 B.R. 436, 443 (Bankr, N.D. Miss. 2008) (Houston) (Citing In re Ransom, 380 B.R. 799 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2007), debtor with CMI greater than applicable median family income is not entitled to Local Standards transportation ownership deduction for car free of debt. “[T]his court believes that the language in § 1325(b)(l)(B) simply does not contemplate an ‘artificial’ deduction when there is no underlying debt. This is consistent with one of the primary objectives of BAPCPA which is to ensure that debtors repay as much of their debt as reasonably possible…. Refusing to permit the debtors to deduct an ownership expense when there is no actual underlying debt results in an increased distribution to unsecured creditors, even if only for a temporary period, with monies that are actually available.”).

In re Young, 392 B.R. 6 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2008) (Hillman) (Summarizing at least seven different positions in reported cases, debtor with CMI greater than applicable median family income is allowed Local Standards housing and utilities expense that exceeds actual rent and transportation ownership expense for unencumbered, operational vehicle.).
See Also: Chapter 7 Bankruptcy