Open Bankruptcy Project

The Pre/Post BAPCPA Lookback Effect

Section 1328(f) was added to the Bankruptcy Code in October 2005 by BAPCPA. This page analyzes the empirical effect of its introduction by comparing pre-2005 counterfactual rates with post-2005 actual rates in the dataset.

The pre/post comparison

PeriodSuccessive Ch.13 filers in sampleWithin lookback (or counterfactual)Counterfactual / actual rate
1993-1995 (pre-BAPCPA)7321~28% counterfactual
1996-2000 (pre-BAPCPA)65144~7% counterfactual
2001-2005 (transition)3,719282~7.6%
2006-2010 (post-BAPCPA)2,475156~6.3%
2011-2015 (post-BAPCPA)2,889183~6.3%
2016-2020 (post-BAPCPA)3,634189~5.2%
2021-2026 (post-BAPCPA)2,343143~6.1%

Reading the trend

Two patterns stand out:

1. The early-1990s spike

The 1993-1995 counterfactual rate (~28%) is dramatically higher than later years. Most likely explanation: the early-90s consumer bankruptcy environment had high recidivism rates because Chapter 13 was being used as a workout tool by debtors who didn't complete the first plan and tried again quickly. The dataset's small sample size in those years (only ~73 successive filers identified) makes the rate volatile.

2. The post-BAPCPA stabilization

From 2005 onward, the rate stabilizes in the 5-7% range. Several factors contribute:

3. The remaining 5-7%

The post-2005 rate doesn't fall to zero. The remaining cases are:

The procedural reform under 26-BK-3

The Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules accepted 26-BK-3 in March 2026. The proposed amendment to Bankruptcy Rule 4004 would require § 1328(f) screening at the petition stage, catching lookback-barred cases at intake rather than at discharge. The empirical work on this page supports the committee's analysis (Tab 4C, p. 125, fn. 4).

If 26-BK-3 is adopted in final form, future iterations of this dataset should show the post-2005 5-7% rate decline further as the procedural screening reduces the population of pro-se filers who unknowingly trigger the bar.