**Exhibit 34.2**

Report of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors

GEConsumer Finance, Inc.:

Wehave examined GE Consumer Finance, Inc.’s (the “Company”) compliance with theservicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and ExchangeCommission’s Regulation AB for credit card asset-backed securities transactionsissued by the GE Credit Card Master Note Trust (the Platform),except for servicing criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(1)(iv),1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(x), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii)and 1122(d)(4)(xiii) which the Company has determined are not applicable to theactivities it performs with respect to the Platform, as of and for the twelvemonths ended December 31, 2006*.*Management isresponsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Ourresponsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s compliance based onour examination.

Ourexamination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the PublicCompany Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, includedexamining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company*’*scompliance with the servicing criteria specified above and performing suchother procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Our examination included testing of less thanall of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that comprisethe Platform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related tothe Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selectedtransactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with theservicing criteria.  Furthermore, ourprocedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activitiesperformed by the Company during the period covered by this report.  Our procedures were not designed to determinewhether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our teststhat may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by theCompany during the period covered by this report for the selected transactionsor any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides areasonable basis for our opinion.  Ourexamination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliancewith the servicing criteria.

Ourexamination disclosed the following instances of material noncompliance withcriteria 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(4)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(viii), and 1122(d)(4)(ix),as applicable to the Company as of and for the twelve months ended December 31,2006.  Regarding 1122(d)(2)(i) and1122(d)(4)(iv) certain obligor remittances due were not remitted to theappropriate clearing accounts and were not applied to the related obligoraccount until the business day following the date required by the related transactionagreements.  Regarding 1122(d)(4)(viii)certain collection efforts were not conducted in accordance with the timeframesrequired by the related transaction agreements. Regarding 1122(d)(4)(ix) certain adjustments to APR’s for pool assetswere not calculated as required by the related pool asset documents.

As described in theaccompanying Management Assertion, for servicing criteria 1122(d)(2)(vii),1122(d)(4)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(vii) and 1122(d)(4)(viii), the Company has engagedvarious vendors to perform the activities required by these servicing criteria.The Company has determined that these vendors are not considered a “servicer”as defined in Item 1101(j) of Regulation AB, and the Company has elected totake responsibility for assessing compliance with the servicing criteriaapplicable to each vendor as permitted by Interpretation 17.06 of the SECDivision of Corporation Finance Manual of Publicly Available TelephoneInterpretations (“Interpretation 17.06”).  As permitted by Interpretation17.06, the Company has asserted that it has policies and procedures in placedesigned to provide reasonable assurance that the vendors’ activities comply inall material respects with the servicing criteria applicable to each vendor. The Company is solely responsible for determining that it meets the SECrequirements to apply Interpretation 17.06 for the vendors and related criteriaas described in its assertion, and we performed no procedures with respect tothe Company’s eligibility to apply Interpretation 17.06.

Inour opinion, except for the instances of material noncompliance describedabove, the Company complied, in all material respects, with the aforementionedservicing criteria, including servicing criteria 1122(d)(2)(vii),1122(d)(4)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(vii) and 1122(d)(4)(viii) for which complianceis determined based on Interpretation 17.06 as described above, as of andfor the twelve months ended December 31, 2006.
|                   |   |
|-------------------|--------|
| /s/ KPMG LLP      |   |
|              |   |
| Chicago, Illinois |
| March 29, 2007    |

 

----