Bankruptcy Laws in the passage of the harsh laws of bankruptcy in 2005 would benefit consumers in the form of reduced losses to lenders making it harder to declare bankruptcy. However, two new reports released this week show that the new laws not only cost consumers more in terms of credit card debt, but may actually encourage further losses for banks due to increased foreclosures. According to new research, following the 2005 bankruptcy reform went into effect, both in bankruptcy filings and credit card losses of the company drastically reduced. At the same time, while the annual fees in advance on credit cards have been virtually eliminated, the rates have been climbing and becoming less transparent the years, and there is no evidence that the 2005 bankruptcy reform reversed this trend . . . limit excess spending and arrears have been rising since long before the bankruptcy reform, and this trend continued after the 2005 reform of bankruptcy. Industry consolidation in the credit card market has allowed the top card issuers to avoid the loss of "price wars" by reducing rates to attract new customers. The industry of credit cards may also be able to avoid price competition because of complex, multiple price levels that may make it difficult for customers to compare prices. These rates and interest rates, complex in its own right-are presented in a way that is difficult to understand. Customers are faced with complex pricing systematically miscalculate and underestimate the cost of credit card debt. A 2006 report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found not only that bank fees and penalties continue to increase for cardholders, but the disclosures of credit card and explanations of fees are deliberately written in ways that make them difficult to understand. The GAO also recommended in a separate report that credit card issuers use existing technology to customize the revelations to individual cardholders, particularly those with large balances or frequent late payments. The fact that after bankruptcy reform, interest rates and fees continued to rise and grace periods continued to fall, although the credit card companies reaped huge profits from the bankruptcy losses demonstrates declining that the credit card market is a competitive price. This lack of price competition explains why the benefits of bankruptcy reform accrued exclusively to credit card lenders and not shared with the average American family, and why. . . bankruptcy reform was a failure. Another negative impact of bankruptcy laws is the increase in foreclosures and defaults by mortgage holders who can not afford to make payments on their homes. The bankruptcy code more stringent, limiting financial assistance available under the Bankruptcy Code and the rising costs of bankruptcy appears to have increased the number of people walking away from their homes, their mortgages, and their other financial obligations without seeking court protection from bankruptcy. Under the new law, most individual taxpayers would be ineligible for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which allows the liquidation and elimination of most of the debt. On the contrary, they would have to file under Chapter 13, which requires regular payments of at least part of its debt with creditors. The stricter requirements of the new laws may cause the owners to "get away" and leave their homes in foreclosure instead of trying to file for bankruptcy. The restrictions on bankruptcy filings and foreclosures resulting increase puts pressure on prices down in neighborhoods where many houses are in default or foreclosure. One of the great lessons and ironies associated with [the new bankruptcy law] is that the new law by increasing the dollar value of assets subject to default has weakened many financial companies that sought bankruptcy code more strict.