Still A Tax Increase If It’s Not Called That, The Houston Chronicle, Feb. 23, 1993, at A16. 12 . State law limitations on loan charges limit the extent of secured claims. See e.g., In re Tastyeast, Inc., 126 F.2d at 881-82 (liquidated damage provision unenforceable penalty); In re Boardwalk Partners, 171 B.R. at 92 (noting that if a default rate interest provision were too high, the court could strike it down as a liquidated damages provision); Matter of Timberline Property Development, Inc., 136 B.R. at 385-86 (enforceability of default interest provision requires both state law and federal bankruptcy law analysis); In re Consolidated Operating Partners L.P., 91 B.R. at 116 (looking to state usury statute to determine validity of default interest term); In re White, 88 B.R. at 510 (<HOLDING>) (citing Butner v. United States, 440 U.S. 48,
holding that nonconsensual oversecured creditor shall receive the statutory rate of interest unless it can be characterized as a penalty holding a bankruptcy court is empowered to reopen a bankruptcy case on its own motion under 11 usc  105a holding that accruing interest at the default interest rate was not a penalty but the addition of a 5 late charge on top of the default interest would have been unreasonable pursuant to  506b and would have therefore been a penalty holding contract unenforceable because rate of interest was of the essence and not detail to be supplied by court holding default interest rate unenforceable as a penalty and recognizing that a bankruptcy court is not empowered to give a creditor rights that state law withholds