payment of taxes from the bankrupt estate would have the effect of clearing away tax claims which otherwise would have remained charges on the real estate in the hands of the mortgagees or the tax sale purchasers. In re Skinner Lumber Co., 35 B.R. 31, 32 (Bankr.D.S.C.1983). If the estate had been required to pay the taxes in Skinner, the secured creditors would have received a windfall, as the estate would have paid a tax claim that would have remained charges on the real property in the “hands of the mortgagees or the tax sale purchasers.” Id. Finally, in examining the purpose of § 502(b)(3), this court must bear in mind “Congress’ historic concern for the collection of taxes due and owing to national, state and local governments.” Lawler v. Henrico County, 636 F.2d 68 (4th Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>). In North Carolina, property taxes assessed on
holding that an anticipated tax refund was property of the bankruptcy estate as of the date the bankruptcy case was filed holding that the bankruptcy court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over counterclaims asserted by the bankruptcy estate against a creditor where the claim is a state law action independent of the federal bankruptcy law and not necessarily resolvable by a ruling on the creditors proof of claim in the bankruptcy emphasis added holding that the question of whether an interest is a claim for bankruptcy purposes is to be resolved by reference to the text history and purpose of the bankruptcy code holding that bankruptcy court is without jurisdiction to control disposition of chapter 13 debtors property that is not property of the bankruptcy estate unless the property is related to the bankruptcy proceedings of the code holding that under the bankruptcy act the taxing authority was allowed a general unsecured claim rather than a priority claim because no interest in the taxed property passed to the bankruptcy estate