Rare Bankruptcy Outcomes — Empirical Dataset v0.1

First-pass empirical view of doctrinally rare bankruptcy outcomes that academic literature has historically lacked the data to study at scale: § 707(b) abuse dismissals, § 1328(b) hardship discharges, § 727(d) discharge revocations, and § 727(a) discharge denials. Derived from 218,913 federal cases.

Headline rare-outcome counts

The full table

What the patterns tell us

The 2014-2015 § 707(b) abuse-dismissal spike

The empirical pattern shows § 707(b) abuse dismissals peaking sharply in 2014 (32 cases) and 2015 (41 cases), then dropping back to the 10-20/year baseline. This 4-5x spike against baseline almost certainly reflects a discrete UST enforcement push during that period — possibly related to specific guidance, training, or directive shifts inside the U.S. Trustee Program. The spike is worth further investigation; correlating with UST policy directives or staffing shifts in those years would identify the specific driver.

§ 1328(b) hardship discharges: rarer than commonly assumed

Legal scholarship on § 1328(b) hardship discharge has long lacked baseline empirical data. Our sample yields 172 hardship discharges across 1990-2026 (an average of ~5/year nationally in the sample). Given the sample's geographic concentration, the true national annual rate is plausibly 20-50/year. This is rare. Most scholars have estimated higher rates based on the seemingly-broad statutory standard; the empirical reality is that few debtors successfully invoke the hardship-discharge alternative even when their plan fails.

§ 727(d) revocations: a 2005 anomaly

Discharge revocations averaged 5-10/year in most years. The 2005 spike to 43 cases coincides exactly with BAPCPA implementation. Plausible explanations:

• Pre-BAPCPA filing surge (October 2005) created cases that were later revoked when documentation issues surfaced post-discharge
• BAPCPA's enhanced documentation requirements made post-discharge fraud detection easier
• UST resources directed at the BAPCPA transition produced more thorough post-discharge review

The post-2005 baseline of 5-10/year is consistent with revocation being a procedurally expensive remedy that's rarely invoked outside clear-fraud cases.

The Chapter 13 plan-failure breakdown

Of all Chapter 13 dismissals (~36,000 in the dataset), ~30% are specifically classified as "failure to make plan payments." This is the empirical floor on the Chapter 13 non-completion rate that's specifically attributable to debtor-side payment default. The remaining 70% of dismissals are for other reasons (voluntary dismissal, conversion, adversary outcomes, etc.). Chapter 13 modification mechanics become particularly relevant for this population.

Methodology and caveats

Open dataset

Three CSVs published under CC BY 4.0:

• rare_outcomes_per_case.csv — 18,574 rows, one per case
• rare_outcomes_by_year.csv — year-by-category time series
• rare_outcomes_by_district.csv — district-by-category aggregates

Citation

Open Bankruptcy Project (2026). Rare Bankruptcy Outcomes Dataset, v0.1.
501(c)(3) public charity (EIN 41-5159631).
URL: https://viz.openbankruptcyproject.org/rare-outcomes/
License: CC BY 4.0

Why this matters

Doctrinally rare outcomes (hardship discharge, abuse dismissal, discharge revocation) are studied by bankruptcy scholars, judges, and the Rules Committee. Empirical data at this scale lets the field move from anecdote-driven analysis to base-rate-grounded analysis. We expect this dataset to be cited in:

• Future Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules notes referencing dismissal-rate empirics
• Academic articles on UST enforcement patterns
• Practitioner-targeted articles on hardship-discharge availability
• Research on Chapter 13 completion vs. failure

If you use the dataset, please cite per the format above.