The issue before us in these consolidated appeals is whether a district court must consider the impact of inflation when awarding attorneys fees under section 204 of the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. Â§ 2412 (1988) (the EAJA or the Act). Specifically, when the court determines that the market rate for attorneys fees exceeds the statutory cap of $75 per hour, must the court then adjust the cap upward to account for cost-of-living increases. We hold that the court must consider cost of living increases when awarding attorneys fees under the EAJA. The district court failed to do so in Meyer v. Sullivan, No. 89-8835; accordingly, we vacate the courts judgment in that case and remand for further proceedings. In each of the other cases, we affirm the district courts judgment.