Whether the formula approach method set forth in Till v. SCS Credit Corp. should apply in Chapter 12 bankruptcy cases

QUESTION PRESENTED One of the requirements to be met in a plan of reorganization proposed under Chapter 12 of Title 11 is that a secured creditor be paid the “present value” of its claim as of the date the bankruptcy petition was filed. 11 U.S.C. § 1225(a)(5)(B)(ii). As in cases under Chapters 11 and 13, when payments under a Chapter 12 plan to a secured creditor occur over time, an appropriate interest rate should be applied to the principal amount to arrive at the required “present value” of the claim. See Till v. SCS Credit Corp., 541 U.S. 465, 473— 74 (2004). In Till, a Chapter 13 case, a plurality of this Court adopted a method to arrive at the appropriate interest on secured claims based on the state of the financial markets, circumstances of the bankruptcy estate, and the characteristic of the subject loan. 541 US. at 477. “Taking its cue from normal lending practices,” the Court adopted the “formula approach,” directing a bankruptcy court to determine first the widely-reported national prime rate at the time and, based on the circumstances, then adjust that rate based on risk, normally an enhancement between 1% to 3%. Id. at 480-81. The Question Presented is whether the formula approach method set forth in Till should also apply in Chapter 12 bankruptcy cases. Since Till, reported bankruptcy court decisions in Chapter 12 cases, including the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel [BAP] for the Tenth Circuit, reflect near unanimity—except for the decision at bar—in applying the ii QUESTION PRESENTED—Continued Till-formula approach to arrive at the appropriate interest rate on secured claims paid over time. See Hall v. US., 566 U.S. 506, 516 (2012) (quoting 8 Collier G 1200.01[5], at 1200-10) (“[C]hapter 13 cases construing provisions corresponding to chapter 12 provisions may be relied on as authority in chapter 12 cases.”). In the case at bar, neither Petitioner nor Respondent dispute the 2% risk enhancement applied by the Bankruptcy Court to Petitioner’s secured claim. Rather, Petitioner appeals the affirmance, by the Eighth Circuit, of the Bankruptcy Court’s decision to discount evidence presented at hearing of normal lending practices in the agricultural loan market and, instead, adopt the twenty-year Treasury bond rate of 1.87%, rather than the national prime rate of 3.25%, as espoused by this Court in Till, to arrive at the interest rate on Petitioner’s Chapter 12 loan under the Respondent’s Plan. With this Petition for Certiorari, the Petitioner requests and urges this Court to review the Court of Appeals decision below in order to bring uniformity and predictability to parties and bankruptcy courts engaged in developing plans of reorganization under Chapter 12 of the United States Bankruptcy Code across the country. While perhaps, technically, a Circuit split has not arisen by virtue of the above-referenced Tenth Circuit BAP decision, the Eighth Circuit’s departure from bankruptcy practice established by courts across the country for close to twenty years of ili QUESTION PRESENTED—Continued applying Till in Chapter 12 cases, works to undermine the justified reliance that parties in Chapter 12 cases have had about at least the basic, agreed starting point required to establish interest rates on secured claims in Chapter 12 cases. A decision by this Court to adopt, explicitly, the formula approach interest rate method in Chapter 12 cases would bring certainty to Chapter 12 cases, thereby serving the purpose of Chapter 12, which is to provide a streamlined and cost-effective path for farmers to reorganize without unnecessary and labor-intensive contested hearings on interest rates.