has been amply analyzed, however, within the context of state exemption statutes for public assistance benefits. One court allowed the EIC exemption under a state statute providing the exemption for “local public assistance benefits,” but did so because the trustee failed to object on the basis of whether or not the EIC was a “local” public assistance benefit. See In re Davis, 136 B.R. 203, 207 (Bankr.S.D.Iowa 1991). The same court apparently later held, on a trustee’s objection based particularly on the “local” issue, that the EIC is not a “local public assistance benefit” under Iowa law. See In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 822, 824-825 (Bankr. S.D.Ga.2000), citing Matter of Peckham, No. 97-01117-WH (Bankr.S.D.Iowa 1998) (unpublished); Matter of Crouch, No. 96-23085-D (Bankr.ND.Iowa 1997) (<HOLDING>). In determining that “federal disaster relief
holding that law enforcement commission was a benefit of employment holding that the claims to a statutory benefit had not yet vested when the legislature eliminated the benefit recognizing the benefit of alternative determinations in the social security review process holding that a plantshutdown benefit is not an optional form of benefit holding that an eic was neither a social security benefit nor a local public assistance benefit