Quote Originally Posted by Chambo View Post
Unfortunately, that is not true. I don't think you want to be the example the AG uses to make a point.

You will simply be making estimations on APR, much like mutual fund companies talk about projected performance. there will be disclaimers that past performance doesn't guarantee....etc, etc.

Once his law passes however, that whiny argument "but there isn't APR on MCA" will get laughed out of court
I agree with Chambo. Issuing MCAs at usurious "rates" without a CFL cost Advanceme a LOT of money in litigation... The "it's not a loan" defense did not hold up, and it set the precedent for why a lot of members here can't fund in California. Not exactly the same set of circumstances but I think it'll be the same result.