The U.S. Trustee Program in 2026

This article originally appeared in the ABI Journal, Vol. XLV, No. 6, June 2026.

The Program has a unique role in promoting the integrity and efficiency of the bankruptcy system. I have had the honor this past year of leading an extraordinary corps of professionals across the country who are committed to fulfilling our mission. Together, we handle more than a million pending bankruptcy cases before more than 300 bankruptcy judges in 88 judicial districts. The Program has always been leanly staffed and prides itself on its agility. This past year we focused on building on earlier management initiatives to leverage our dispersed workforce and improve our efficiency while yet again delivering exceptional results in performing our statutory mandate. I am pleased to share the Program’s accomplishments and how we are adapting for the future.

The USTP Has Achieved Extraordinary Success

During the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, the USTP successfully managed a 25 percent staffing reduction. We began the fiscal year in October 2024 with about 950 staff and 89 field offices. In reducing expenses by $40 million to reach the current enacted appropriation level of $205 million, our staffing level decreased to about 710 employees as of October 2025 through staff attrition—including the government-wide Deferred Resignation Program—and the Department of Justice’s hiring freeze. The Program has significantly cut rent costs, including by closing or consolidating smaller offices to end with 82 overall. The USTP also effectuated other substantial cost savings pursuant to the broader government efficiency initiatives, most notably through decreased contract spending and information technology enhancements.

At the same time, the Program continued to excel in our enforcement efforts to combat fraud and abuse. In FY 2025, the USTP took more than 25,000 civil enforcement actions, including consensual resolutions not requiring court action, with a potential monetary impact of more than $915 million in debts not discharged, fees returned, fines, penalties and other relief. Both the number of actions and monetary impact exceeded the previous year’s totals. 

Notable actions included obtaining the court’s approved waiver of discharge by a chapter 7 debtor—preventing the discharge of more than $47 million in unsecured debt—following the USTP’s investigation confirming that the debtor used new investor funds to pay both prior investors in his company and personal expenses.[Footnote 1] The Program also obtained sanctions against four individuals connected to the filing of fraudulent bankruptcy petitions bearing forged signatures of a deceased person in a scheme to stall a foreclosure and gain possession of the decedent’s real property.[Footnote 2]

Criminal referrals also remain a top priority. The USTP referred more than 2,200 bankruptcy and bankruptcy-related matters to our law enforcement partners in FY 2025, for which the total also surpassed the prior year. Staff also provided post-referral assistance, including serving as Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys (SAUSA). As an example, in a case prosecuted by two USTP Trial Attorneys serving as SAUSAs, the defendant was sentenced to 90 months in prison after admitting to devising a scheme to impersonate creditors and submit false documents to 28 bankruptcy courts requesting unclaimed funds of more than $550,000.[Footnote 3]

To promote the coherent and consistent application of bankruptcy law throughout the country, the Program engaged in crucial litigation before the bankruptcy courts and on appeal on significant systemic issues. Foremost among these is vindicating the Supreme Court’s decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,[Footnote 4] agreeing with the Program’s position that the Bankruptcy Code does not authorize releases of creditors’ claims against non-debtor third parties without consent. Because the Court did not define what constitutes consent for non-debtor releases, the Program continues to litigate against releases that would bind creditors without their affirmative and knowing consent. While the Program has had mixed success in the bankruptcy courts, this important issue is currently before the Second Circuit and Fifth Circuit Courts of Appeals.[Footnote 5]

Similarly, the Program intervened and won at the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in In re Aquilino,[Footnote 6] to ensure that bankruptcy courts remain the forum in which to combat misconduct committed against consumer debtors. Every year the Program brings hundreds of actions, most notably under 11 U.S.C. §§ 110, 329 and 526, to obtain fines, penalties and the return of fees from attorneys and bankruptcy petition preparers who engage in various forms of misconduct or overcharge their debtor clients. In this case, the district court reversed the bankruptcy court’s order requiring the debtor’s law firm to disgorge its fees due to the firm’s failure to disclose the terms of its retention as required under 11 U.S.C. § 329. The Third Circuit affirmed the bankruptcy court’s order as a valid exercise of its constitutional and statutory authority to address abusive conduct.[Footnote 7]

Beyond these impressive results, the USTP’s success in accomplishing its mission is remarkable as staff also handled an increase in filings that continued to grow by double-digits for the third year in a row. Significantly, pending chapter 11 cases reached the highest number in nearly a decade. Among those, subchapter V cases increased nearly 60 percent over the past three fiscal years. We also continued to supervise more than 900 chapter 7, 12 and 13 private trustees who distributed more than $6 billion to creditors. 

Finally, our duties in furthering the integrity and efficiency of the bankruptcy system extend beyond the courtroom. Thus, another vital priority was addressing the expiration of the Bankruptcy Administration Improvement Act (BAIA) of 2020 through the successful enactment of BAIA 2025. Both laws promote the proper functioning of the bankruptcy process and ensure that users continue to pay for the system without cost to taxpayers. They accomplish those important goals by temporarily increasing the USTP’s quarterly fee collections in larger chapter 11 reorganization cases that are used to offset its appropriations and to fund the extension of temporary bankruptcy judgeships, and they provided different mechanisms to fund a long-warranted increase in compensation paid to chapter 7 trustees. 

Under BAIA 2020, the USTP collected sufficient quarterly fees above its appropriation to fully fund the $60 maximum in additional compensation paid to the chapter 7 trustees under 11 U.S.C. § 330(e) for eligible cases filed or converted in both FY 2024 and FY 2025. In anticipation of BAIA 2020’s expiration this year, the Program provided substantial technical assistance to Congress on the BAIA 2025 bill. As enacted in February, BAIA 2025 temporarily extended through 2031 and adjusted the schedule for quarterly fee collections that offset the USTP’s appropriation and fund temporary bankruptcy judgeships; permanently reallocated chapter 7 filing fees to double the “no asset” fee paid to private case trustees to $120; and further extended temporary bankruptcy judgeships. BAIA 2025 improved the bankruptcy system by avoiding a substantial decrease in quarterly fee collections upon the expiration of BAIA 2020 needed to offset the USTP’s appropriations; ensuring that temporary judgeships are extended and funded; and permanently increasing chapter 7 trustees’ compensation.

For more on the USTP’s impressive results this past fiscal year, I encourage you to read the Program’s Annual Report of Significant Accomplishments for FY 2025, which is available on the USTP website.[Footnote 8]

Moving the USTP Forward

The Program is not expected to return to previous staffing or funding levels. To continue accomplishing the Program’s mission, we are adjusting in three ways.

First, we are working beyond the physical boundaries of field offices and the statutorily defined regions to leverage our talented staff wherever they may be located. For example, attorneys may file pleadings or appear in courts other than those located in their districts, especially in matters that are heard remotely. Many trustee oversight responsibilities can be performed centrally, such as reviewing chapter 7 trustee final reports to ensure timely distribution of funds to creditors, reconciliation of trustees’ bank account information, and reviewing the collateralization of trustees’ funds for compliance with 11 U.S.C. § 345. Instead of each field office performing the same functions, through shared staffing we will amplify our impact while enhancing consistency and uniformity across the Program.

Second, we are sharpening our focus on the Program’s core, statutorily mandated duties, including those that we undertake outside the view of the bench and bar. Trustee supervision remains a top priority, as do criminal referrals and assisting law enforcement. In our civil enforcement work, we aim to maximize the impact of our efforts in targeting fraud and abuse.

Third, we are evaluating, consolidating and streamlining the USTP’s processes to optimize efficiency and efficacy. As part of those efforts, we are developing and implementing technological enhancements that, among other things, facilitate collaboration among employees regardless of office boundaries. And we are identifying best practices developed by individual offices for broader implementation within the Program. By operating globally and focusing on the things that we must accomplish, we can deploy our resources more efficiently while enhancing our flexibility and consistency. 

Conclusion

The Program’s ongoing success proves once again that our strength lies in our talented and dedicated people. They are resilient and work tirelessly across the country to ensure that the bankruptcy process functions smoothly and the laws are applied and enforced consistently. And together we are united in our commitment to accomplishing the Program’s vital mission benefiting the bankruptcy system by undertaking our statutory responsibilities while maximizing our efficiency.

Footnotes:

[1]  In re Grubbs, No. 23-05593, Dkt. No. 369 (Bankr. S.D. Ind. May 14, 2025).

[2]  Townson v. Clark, et al. (In re Acree), No. 23-53135, 2025 Bankr. LEXIS 377, 2025 WL 567155 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Feb. 20, 2025).

[3]  United States v. Osagbue, No. 24-00129, Dkt. No. 146 (D.P.R. July 14, 2025).

[4]  603 U.S. 204 (2024)

[5]  In re Gol Linhas Aereas Inteligentes S.A., No. 26-49 (2nd Cir.); In re The Container Store Grp., Inc., No. 26-20166 (5th Cir.).

[6]  135 F.4th 119 (3d Cir. 2025)

[7]  Id. at 137.

[8]  See https://www.justice.gov/ust/media/1441291/dl?inline.