With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 500 B.R. at 800; see also Wogoman v. Internal Revenue Serv. (In re Wogo-man), 475 B.R. 239, 248-49 (10th Cir. BAP 2012). Under this test, in order for a document to qualify as a return under § 523, “(1) it must purport to be a return; (2) it must be executed under penalty of perjury; (3) it must contain sufficient data to allow calculation of tax; and (4) it must represent an honest and reasonable attempt to satisfy the requirements of the tax law.” Hindenlang, 164 F.3d at 1033 (internal quotations and citation omitted). Prior to BAPCPA, a debtor’s tardiness was relevant to the question of whether a tax return qualified as an honest and genuine attempt to comply with the tax laws, thereby satisfying the fourth prong of the Beard test. See, e.g., In re Moroney, 352 F.3d at 906-907 (<HOLDING>). As we previously explained, due to the BAPCPA

A: holding that a return filed postassessment by the irs does not satisfy fourth element of beard test
B: holding that the defendant failed to make out a prima facie test when he could not satisfy the statistical showing required by the second duren element and declining to analyze the third element
C: holding that irs was bound by plan and bankruptcy codes method of determining amount of nondischargeable claim where irs had filed proof of claim for nondischargeable tax debt
D: holding that a decedents tax settlement with the irs did not establish the value of his estates claim against the irs as a matter of law
A.