Quote Originally Posted by Karen37a View Post
Its not cost of capital they want to say APR

for the 100th time

Stop playing semantics to prove your point von Mises...you are wrong
If "they" wanted contracts to state "APR", the legislation would have made reference to "APR". It does not. The language is quite clear. And by citing the annualized cost of capital in a contract, you are NOT somehow negating all the language of the sale of future receivables, and turning it into a loan. Period.

Its as if you make the argument that apples really are oranges, because both are fruit.