Jason, that's awesome news! Is anyone over at Fundkite be able to tell us what they think with regards to their ACH split program?
Printable View
The disclosure still applies to credit card splits. The disclosures are required for financial products, regardless of repayment method. ACH Remits are not "fixed", or at least they should not be. ACH remit amounts should be calculated based on a percentage of merchant's calculated average sales at the time of funding. Should merchant's sales deviate, the ACH remit amount should as well. This is why "true-ups" are done on a regular basis.
Split deals are 100% subject to the disclosure law. The state doesn't care if payments can't be predicted or are variable or whatever. That's partially why the law has been the subject of so much controversy. You must disclose an APR and predict.
This is not true. The whole point of the the disclosure law is your specific product to begin with, to create and disclose APRs for unknowable things. Your business model is a textbook case of what the law covers. You have 2 days now to be ready for compliance.
There are multiple things being discussed in this thread.
1. lender/broker licensing (an old requirement)
2. commercial financing disclosure (a new requirement)
---
1. If you do MCA, the answer to #1 is something your lawyer will have to answer. In the past it has been possible to do MCAs without a license. It also been risky so you must talk to an attorney about this.
2. If you do MCA, whether ACH or split, you are subject to the commercial financing disclosure law that goes into effect in 2 days and all that entails. It is a highly complex law with a lot of moving pieces. You cannot wing it and throw in a form or whatever and think you'll be good. These regulations took more than 4 years to create and it requires very competent legal counsel to even attempt to successfully navigate.
If you are wondering "where the heck do I even start on this California thing?" It's taken 4 years to formulate the final complex rules. Expect to spend a lot of money on competent legal counsel.
This guide (of which I make no money on referrals or anything) for example, will give you all the basic info: https://www.counselorlibrary.com/pub...ures-guide.cfm Yeah, it's really expensive ($7,000) and you will still ultimately need an attorney to assist you with compliance on top of it but ignoring the law could lead to a place where you are facing millions in fines and lawsuits.
Sean --TY! --Right on!
I am not sure that is correct @Sterling ^ you can try it out but when the ambulance chasers come knocking you will have to battle that statement and risk paying huge fines or having your contracts deemed unenforceable for repayment. There are case laws in CA historically that thought their contracts were iron clad and both cases were settled for millions of $ . Today, this law takes effect.
Doesn't really matter what Sean and DeBanked say, it matters what the State of California says.
As far as I can decipher, sending to super broker doesn't add any benefit in this case. As of Friday, ALL OFFERS must be sent directly to the merchant, and the funder needs to receive a Received Receipt, before anything written can be sent to any broker, super or mortal. Penalties are far more severe than the other penalties mentioned to date.
In summary, when a Cali merchant is sent to funder, they will tell you "offer was sent" and that's about it until the merchant acknowledges receiving it. No details can be given.
I guess this also means the days of hiding the phone #'s and emails from the funder are over as well.