business partners looking over merchant cash advances

Should My Franchise Take A Merchant Cash Advance?

Running a franchise can be lucrative if you have steady sales and access to working capital. While a merchant cash advance can help your franchise make payroll, acquire inventory, and cover expenses, expected and unexpected, there are risks. Let’s discuss whether or not your franchise should take a merchant cash advance (MCA).

How MCAs Help Franchises

Most banks will not extend credit to franchises, even those with perfect credit and outstanding revenue, so franchises turn to MCA providers. A merchant cash advance is not a loan. Instead, it is the purchase and sale of future receivables in exchange for a lump sum of cash. 

An MCA can help to maintain cash flow and provide working capital to hire new staff, pay outstanding debt, renovate your location, and grow your franchise. Approval is quick and easy, and funds are available in 3 to 5 business days. Monthly credit card sales volume dictates payment terms. Payments are lower when sales volume decreases. This provides stability to franchises that lack access to traditional sources of capital. 

Spoiler alert: merchant cash advances are risky and contain onerous terms that can force a franchise into bankruptcy. Let’s review the pros and cons of MCAs for franchises and what to do if you default.

Is A Merchant Cash Advance Right for My Franchise?

An MCA provides working capital for purchasing inventory, obtaining supplies and equipment, meeting payroll, and covering unexpected business expenses. A merchant cash advance may be a funding option if your franchise has consistent sales. 

The MCA provider advances a lump sum of cash in exchange for a percentage of your credit sales. That percentage, known as a “holdback,” is based on the advance amount, the payment term, and prior monthly sales. While MCAs are sold as “no interest” or “no collateral required,” read the fine print.

An MCA is based on a factor rate up to 3 times as high as an interest rate or APR (annual percentage rate) for a traditional business loan. Also, MCAs are repayable in as little as 3 months to no more than 18 months. These short payment terms and high factor rates make merchant cash advances an expensive form of funding.

Another risk is defaulting on an MCA agreement. If the franchise cannot meet the repayment terms, the funder can quickly get a court judgment and seize the business assets, forcing the franchise to close. Also, MCA providers typically require franchisees to sign personal guarantees, which means the funder can levy your home, car, bank accounts, and other assets.  

How To Reconcile Your Merchant Cash Advance

The experienced debt relief specialists at can help if your franchise is about to default on a merchant cash advance. A properly structured MCA agreement will include a reconciliation clause requiring the MCA provider to restructure the payment plan if the franchise experiences a receivables shortfall.

We can help to negotiate your payment plan and explore alternatives if reconciling your cash advance is not feasible. We work to protect small businesses and franchises around the country and have an impressive track record of success. Contact our office today by completing the convenient intake form.

Client signing legal document

Amazon Gets Into Merchant Cash Advance Game

Back in February, we reported DoorDash was set to offer merchant cash advances (here). Not to be outdone, Amazon recently announced it was getting into the merchant cash advance (MCA) market. These developments indicate the MCA business is swiftly moving online. 

Whether lawmakers and regulators will be able to keep pace remains to be seen. Until then, you should contact We advise businesses struggling under the terms of MCA agreements. Let’s look at Amazon’s new merchant cash advance program and what this means for third-party sellers. 

How Does Amazon’s Merchant Cash Advance Program Work?

In November, Amazon announced it is partnering with fintech startup Parafin to provide merchant cash advances to its sellers. The San Francisco-based company was founded in 2020 by former data scientists and engineers of Robinhood seeking to help small businesses that were left behind during the pandemic. Parafin provides end-to-end financing solutions to e-commerce platform sellers. 

“Amazon is committed to providing convenient and flexible access to capital for our sellers, regardless of their size,” said Tai Koottatep, director and general manager, of Amazon WW B2B Payments & Lending, in the announcement.

The MCA program offers advances in capital amounts from as low as $500 to as much as $10 million. Repayment is based on a portion of future sales. Sellers are not required to make minimum payments, pledge collateral, or even pay interest or late fees. 

Because personal guarantees and credit checks are not required for approval, MCAs are advantageous to business loans. According to Amazon’s site, sellers who take MCAs only pay a fixed capital fee.  This fee is not clearly explained, but more about that later.

Who Is Eligible for An Amazon/Parin Merchant Cash Advance?

Amazon’s MCA program is only available to select sellers who have been on the e-commerce site for at least 3 months. The program will be available to more sellers in early 2023, according to Amazon. Minimum sales and valuation requirements are not specified. 

The platform helps Amazon retain sellers while drawing revenue from a share of every advance – third-party sellers account for half of the tech giant’s retail revenue. Expanding to the MCA market comes as no surprise since Amazon already offers direct business loans through Amazon lending and business lines of credit in partnership with Marcus by Goldman Sachs. 

“It’s a privilege to count ourselves among Amazon’s suite of financial solutions, and we look forward to making a difference for sellers looking to expand their business,” said Vineet Goel, co-founder of Parafin.

Merchant cash advance client sitting with attorney

Are Merchant Cash Advance Customers Consumers?

A merchant cash advance (MCA) is not a loan but the purchase and sale of future receivables in exchange for an upfront, lump-sum cash advance. Federal and state consumer laws do not strictly regulate these alternative funding products. These laws only cover natural persons and loans for personal or household purposes, such as credit cards and mortgages.

Given the widespread unfair and deceptive practices in small business lending, the Federal Trade Commission is expanding consumer protection enforcement in several business-to-business areas, including merchant cash advances. Moreover, several states have enacted disclosure requirements for these alternative funding products. Let’s look at the enhanced regulatory scrutiny of merchant cash advances.

The FTC’s Authority 

The agency’s prohibition of unfair and deceptive practices under Section 5 of the FTC Act does not expressly define or limit “consumers.” Therefore, the FTC has relied on this authority to apply the FTC Act to cases where the alleged victims are small and midsized businesses. Rather than litigation, the FTC typically pursues enforcement actions.

FTC Enforcement Actions Against MCA Providers

The FTC has brought enforcement actions involving alleged harm to businesses in several contexts, including labor practices, payment processes, small business lending, and merchant cash advances. 

In 2020, for example, the FTC took action against Yellowstone Capital, alleging several unfair and deceptive practices (UDAP) violations, including:

  • Falsely advertising MCAs do not require collateral or personal guarantees
  • Providing customers with significantly less than the total amount of financing promised
  • Failing to disclose fees
  • Making unauthorized withdrawals from customer accounts after they had fully repaid

Yellowstone and its owners settled the case for $10 million. The settlement agreement also permanently barred the company from misrepresenting its funding products and making unauthorized withdrawals from customer accounts.

In January 2022, the FTC banned Ram Capital Funding LLC (RAM) and its owner from participating in the merchant cash advance (MCA) and debt collection industries. The FTC also ordered the defendants to pay a $675,000 judgment.

State Disclosure Requirments For Merchant Cash Advances

Consumer loans have long had strict disclosure requirements at the state and federal levels, including those under TILA (the Truth-in-Lending Act). Because TILA does not apply to business loans, several states have enacted disclosure requirements for MCAs, including California, New York, Utah, and Virginia. While laws vary from state to state, MCA providers must make the following disclosures:

  • The total amount of the financing
  • The finance charge (e.g. factor rate)
  • A description of all other fees
  • The total repayment amount
  • The estimated number of payments
  • The payment amounts
  • Prepayment penalties, if any
  • Collateral requirements (e.g. personal guarantee, confession of judgment)

Although MCAs are not considered consumer loans under state laws, businesses now have certain “consumer protections” because of these disclosure requirements.

Why This Matters

The FTC and several states are looking more closely at merchant cash advances. However, MCA providers still have the upper hand over cash-strapped businesses. MCA agreements typically contain onerous provisions like confessions of judgment and personal guarantees allowing the funder to seize the owner’s assets in the event of default. 

Don’t wait for the government to come to your rescue if your business cannot repay a merchant cash advance. Turn to instead. Our debt relief specialists will work to negotiate your repayment plan with the MCA provider, help you avoid a default, and protect the business you’ve worked so hard to build. Contact us today by completing the convenient intake form.

Client working with attorney on merchant cash advance lawsuit

MCA Providers May Face Racketeering Class Action Lawsuit

In October, a US District Court judge ruled that merchant cash advance (MCA) agreements barring small businesses from participating in class-action lawsuits may violate New York’s lending laws. This case highlights the increased scrutiny of merchant cash advances by federal regulators, state lawmakers, and the courts.

The Backdrop

In February, several businesses filed a racketeering lawsuit against a group of MCA providers, including GoFund Advance LLC, Funding 123 LLC, and Merchant Capital LLC. The lawsuit alleges the MCA companies (the defendants) operated a predatory lending enterprise by persuading small businesses (the plaintiffs) to sign one-sided contracts that were usurious with interest rates exceeding 500 percent.

The agreements included a provision whereby the plaintiffs agreed to waive their right to participate in a class-action lawsuit against the plaintiffs. In June, district judge Jed Rakoff denied the defendants’ request to dismiss the case while narrowing plaintiffs’ claims. Judge Rakoff has served as a U.S. district judge for the Southern District of New York since March 1996 and was a leading figure in financial regulation and the judicial response to the 2008 financial crisis.

Rakoff recently ruled that those waivers, and the contracts, may be void if their terms violate state lending laws. A lawyer for the plaintiffs said the ruling was a “plaintiff-friendly” standard. Now that Rakoff has denied the lenders’ attempt to block the defendants from taking collective action, he must still decide whether the claims should be certified as a class action.

A class-action lawsuit is one in which many plaintiffs bring claims for similar injuries or losses. The plaintiffs combine their claims into a single action to recover damages suffered by all members of the class. 

Why This Matters

Whether the judge will grant the plaintiffs class-action status remains to be seen. Notably, merchant cash advances are not loans but the purchase and sale of future receivables in exchange for upfront cash. Therefore, MCAs do not fall under New York State consumer lending or usury laws. 

Although Judge Rakoff played a lead role in the proposed settlements with Bank of America and Citigroup during the financial crisis, a finding that MCAs violate New York lending laws is uncertain at best. The question comes down to how the contracts were structured. 

A typical MCA agreement will include a reconciliation clause that requires the funder to restructure the payment plan if the borrower experiences a business downturn and meet the payment terms. This clause means that the agreement is not a demand for payment and, therefore, not a loan. 

In any event, merchant cash advance providers continue to be under the microscope, and these alternative funding products may see greater regulatory scrutiny. In the meantime, if your business is struggling under the terms of an MCA agreement, contact the experienced debt relief specialists at

Medical practice owner with debt relief specialist

Funding Options for Medical Practices

Long-term loans such as bank loans may not be the best option for medical practices. Today, more and more medical professionals are considering short-term funding options, such as lines of credit, invoice factoring, and merchant cash advances. Let’s look at the benefits and risks of each funding option.

Business Lines of Credit

Lines of credit provide medical practices with access to working capital without the payment obligations of a fixed-term loan. Lines of credit offer the flexibility of withdrawing and repaying as much as needed and only paying interest on the amount borrowed against the credit line. 

Both traditional and alternative lenders offer lines of credit; however, traditional lenders have stricter credit criteria, including higher credit scores. Alternative lenders are more flexible and consider other factors, such as:

  • Revenue
  • Cash flow
  • Vendor payment history
  • Years in business

Lines of credit are best for medical practices with strong credit histories that need flexible access to working capital.

Invoice Factoring

Also known as accounts receivable financing, invoice factoring allows a doctor’s office to sell its outstanding invoices to a lender or “factor” in exchange for a set amount in cash equal to 70 to 90 percent of the invoice’s value, usually up to a maximum of $100,000. 

Once a patient pays their bill, the factor remits the remaining 10 to 30 percent of the invoice, minus the factoring fee. Repayment terms typically align with the accounts receivable period, generally between 60 and 120 days. To approve funding, the factor will:

  • Review and determine patients’ creditworthiness
  • Analyze previous invoices
  • Assess how successful the practice has been in collecting payment

The factoring fee will be based on the results of their risk assessment. Invoice factoring is best for medical practices with long accounts receivable periods that need to fill the gap between sending invoices and receiving payment, but with invoices not more than 90 days past due.

Because the factor oversees collecting payment from your patients, choosing one you can trust to treat your clients tactfully during the collection process is essential so that you don’t compromise the doctor-patient relationship with your clients.

Merchant Cash Advances

A merchant cash advance (MCA) is not a loan but a form of financing known as an asset purchase. In exchange for a cash advance, the MCA provider will automatically deduct a portion of the practice’s future receivables until the advance is repaid. Payment amounts are based on revenue: when revenue is lower, payments will be reduced — and vice versa. 

Unlike bank loans based on an interest rate, merchant cash advances are priced on a factor rate, which is determined by the practice’s financial history. MCAs are typically easier to obtain than other types of funding because credit criteria are less strict than those for traditional medical practice loans. 

Merchant cash advances are well-suited for medical practices that need fast access to working capital; however, there are risks. If the business defaults on the MCA agreement, the funder can quickly seize the owner’s assets, including medical equipment and other business assets. Also, merchant cash advances are not strictly regulated and some MCA providers are not reputable. 

The Takeaway

Medical practices are relying on alternative sources of funding for working capital. While lines of credit and invoice factoring offer flexibility, merchant cash advances carry greater risks. Whether you are considering funding options or struggling under the terms of an MCA agreement, contacting an experienced debt relief specialist is a wise choice.

Exchange of financial documents

Louisiana Men Charged With Defrauding Merchant Cash Company

In August, a federal grand jury indicted 6 Louisiana men on charges of conspiring to commit wire fraud and money laundering by creating shell companies to defraud a merchant cash advance (MCA) provider. 

The Backdrop

Federal prosecutors said in the indictments the defendants conspired to use several shell Louisiana companies with no assets to defraud a Georgia-based MCA provider. Four men posed as “owners” of existing corporations who created false vendor accounts, while the other two falsified bank statements for those shell corporations. 

The lead defendant then used an alias to present himself as a broker for the bogus companies. He then provided the MCA company with false information to obtain funding.  The MCA provider approved the advances and electronically advanced $6.4 million to the four men, who laundered a portion of the funds by paying kickbacks to other defendants. 

All the defendants face a maximum sentence of 5 years for wire fraud and up to 20 years for money laundering. In addition, the wire fraud charges are punishable by fines of up to $250,000, while the money laundering counts also include probation and up to $500,000 in fines. 

Finally, a federal grand jury indicted the lead defendant in October 2020 for conspiracy to commit bank fraud and money laundering and allegedly using ill-gotten gains to purchase a home in Louisiana and properties in Mississippi. 

Why This Matters

While wrongdoing in the alternative funding market often centers on unscrupulous MCA providers, this story highlights how businesses can also engage in illegal conduct against funders. 

Nonetheless, the merchant cash advance market remains largely unregulated, leaving businesses that take MCAs little recourse if a funder takes advantage of them. A merchant cash advance is not a loan but a type of funding known as an asset purchase. The funder advances a lump sum of cash to the business in exchange for a percentage of its future sales. 

Merchant cash advances are best for small businesses that need fast access to working capital and have little or no credit history. If there is a business downturn and the owner cannot repay the advance, the funder can seize the owner’s business and personal assets. 

Whether the defendants in this fraud and money laundering scheme will be convicted remains to be seen. In the meantime, talk to an experienced debt relief specialist if your business is struggling under the terms of an MCA agreement.

woman looking over merchant cash advance agreement

Global Merchant Cash Advance Market Set To Grow By 6 Percent Over 10 Years

A recent report indicates the global merchant cash advance (MCA) market will grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of approximately 6 percent from 2022 to 2032. This report highlights the strength of the MCA market but skirts around the risks of merchant cash advances and the consequences of defaulting on an MCA agreement

What Is A Merchant Cash Advance?

A merchant cash advance is a type of funding commonly used by entrepreneurs, startups, and small businesses looking for an alternative to bank loans and lines of credit. Traditional loans have strict lending criteria, including good credit, cash on hand, a minimum of 2 years of business history, and require the borrower to provide collateral.

By contrast, an MCA is the purchase and sale of future receivables (credit card sales) in exchange for lump sum cash upfront. The cash can be used as working capital to purchase inventory, hire staff, meet payroll, and pay unexpected business expenses. The credit criteria for an MCA are far less stringent than a bank loan – approval is based on an analysis of prior sales. The advance is paid back by daily withdrawals from the business’s checking account, based on an agreed-upon percentage. 

The main benefits of an MCA include:

  • Significant lowering of collateral requirements
  • Flexible repayment terms 
  • No mandatory deposits

There are risks, however, including the potential for default if the business experiences a downturn. We’ll get to that in the minute.

The Outlook Is Solid For Merchant Cash Advance Providers

The MCA market report shows that the industry is strong, the wealth involved, fields about to grow, and the risks associated with marketing in this industry. Key players profiled in the report include:

  • Fundbox
  • Finical Holdings
  • Square Inc.
  • National Funding
  • CAN Capital
  • Credibly
  • Merchant Source Inc.
  • Fora Financial

Small businesses that lack access to traditional credit sources have been turning to these funders since the 2008 financial crisis; this trend has accelerated during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Covid-19 Impact on Small Businesses

The Covid-19 pandemic and the resulting restrictions caused cash flow problems for small businesses around the country and the world. While many tapped the federal government’s PPP loan program, others looked to the merchant cash advance market for funding. Some that have taken MCAs may be struggling to repay the advance, putting their assets at risk. 

A typical MCA agreement includes a confession of judgment in which the business acknowledges liability for the advance and waives any defenses. Funders also require owners to sign personal guarantees and pledge their assets. If the business defaults, the funder can seize the assets and force the business to close. 

How To Reconcile A Merchant Cash Advance

A merchant cash advance is not considered a loan for two reasons. First, an MCA is the purchase and sale of future receivables, akin to invoice factoring. Second, an MCA agreement includes a reconciliation clause, requiring the funder to restructure the repayment terms if the business experiences a downturn. That means the MCA agreement is not a demand for payment and, therefore, not a loan. 

The business must notify the funder of a receivables shortfall and demonstrate that it can return to profitability to reconcile the advance. That’s where an experienced merchant cash advance attorney at can help. If you are facing default, our debt relief specialists will help you gather the necessary financial information and negotiate new payment terms with your MCA provider. Contact our office today by completing the convenient intake form to get started.

business owner reviewing MCA

Challenges For Small Businesses When Inflation And Interest Rates Are Rising

Having cash on hand is critical for small businesses, especially during this time of high inflation and rising interest rates. Securing funding is more challenging, however, as lenders have tightened their credit criteria in response to recent moves by the Federal Reserve. 

Most recently, the Fed raised a key lending rate by 75 basis points (.75 percent) and may continue raising rates in a bid to tame inflation. So, businesses that need funding are turning to alternative products, including merchant cash advances. There are risks involved with these funding products, not the least of which is default and the potential for bankruptcy. 

Cash Is King

Cash flow is the fuel of any small business. Whether a startup or an established business, securing funding can mean the difference between success and failure, and failure’s no success at all. Small businesses need cash to navigate supply chain issues and absorb increasing fuel, labor, and raw material costs. The amount of funding a company requires hinges on factors such as:

  • Type of business
  • Time in business
  • Credit history
  • Use of funds

Securing a bank loan or line of credit may be an option for businesses that qualify, but others may need to consider alternatives. 

Alternative Funding Options for Small Businesses

Financing a small business in this environment is challenging but not impossible. Alternative funders and nonbank lenders can give your business funding more quickly than traditional banks. One option for a business is a merchant cash advance (MCA), which provides a quick source of working capital, and has fewer requirements and less stringent credit criteria.

Unlike a bank loan, an MCA is not pegged to an interest rate but a factor rate ranging from 1.2 to 1.5. Converting a factor rate into an APR (annual percentage rate) can produce a triple-digit figure, which is a very high cost of funding.

Another feature of an MCA is the holdback amount, which is the percentage of sales deduced each day from revenues. However, a business that experiences a receivables shortfall may not be able to meet the repayment terms and default. In this situation, the MCA provider can quickly move to seize assets, forcing the business to close.

The Bottom Line

Because of the current economic conditions, businesses must consider funding options carefully. And if yours has taken a merchant cash advance and facing default, you have options. By consulting an experienced merchant cash advance lawyer, you can reconcile your cash advance, restructure the payment terms, and protect the business you’ve worked hard to build. That’s where comes in. Our debt relief specialists work with small businesses around the country to reconcile their merchant cash advances. Contact our office today by completing the convenient intake form. Our team is available 24/7.

Debt Relief Specialist shaking hands with client

Merchant Cash Providers Hit With Class-Action Lawsuit

A proposed class-action lawsuit has been filed against Penn Capital Funding, MapCap Funding, and other merchant cash advance (MCA) companies that used a loophole in Connecticut law to collect unlawful debts and otherwise fraudulently obtain money. 

According to the complaint, filed in Manhattan Federal Court, a loophole in Connecticut law allows MCA providers to freeze out-of-state bank accounts of out-of-state businesses that have taken an MCA simply by serving process on a bank with a branch in that state. 

The MCA providers say the account freezes are justified because the small businesses attest under oath they owe the debt and are unaware of defenses to any claims. However, New York banned out-of-state confessions of judgment in 2019.  

The complaint claims that the defendants used the apparent loophole more than 180 times in 2021 against businesses that operate in New York, freezing their accounts without notice and using duress to obtain repayment. 

The class-action lawsuit also alleges that the defendants collected unlawful interest and then went dark after over-collecting money from these businesses, including lead plaintiff Avant Gard Senior Living, a California-based assisted living facility.  

The lawsuit is seeking certification of a class of persons in the United States who, on or after February 25, 2018, paid money to any of the defendants under a merchant cash advance agreement with an effective interest rate of excess of 25 percent.

Why This Matters

Whether the court will certify the class remains to be seen. However, this case highlights the longstanding abuses in the merchant cash advance industry. MCAs serve as alternative funding for small businesses that lack access to traditional bank loans and lines of credit.

A merchant cash advance is not a loan but rather the purchase and sale of future sales receivables in exchange for a lump sum of cash that businesses can use for working capital. However, MCA agreements contain onerous terms like confessions of judgment and personal guarantees that jeopardize the business owner’s assets should they default on the agreement.

Because MCAs are not loans, they are not strictly regulated at the state or federal level. However, New York has attempted to rein in the abuses of MCA providers by banning the use of confessions of judgment by MCA providers not domiciled in the state. The apparent loophole in Connecticut’s law has enabled the defendants to circumvent New York’s prohibition on confessions of judgment.

The Takeaway 

The outcome of this case remains unclear, but it is part of an ongoing trend of litigation and enforcement actions by the Federal Trade Commission against MCA providers. Meanwhile, you have options if your business is struggling under the terms of an MCA agreement

A properly structured agreement will include a reconciliation clause that requires the funder to restructure the repayment terms if the business experiences a receivables shortfall.  The best way to protect the business you worked so hard to build is to contact an experienced debt relief specialist.

Merchant Cash Advance attorney and client

FTC Bans Merchant Cash Provider For Deceptive Practices

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently obtained a court order permanently banning RCG Advances, LLC and its owner from the merchant cash advance industry. The FTC filed lawsuits against RCG and other merchant cash providers in 2021 for deceiving small business owners about the terms and fees for financing and threatening violence when they did not pay.

“These defendants lied to small businesses about financing, stole money from their accounts, made violent threats, and gave false documents to the courts,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, in a press release.
The court order also requires RCG and its owner to make an upfront payment of $1.5 million and a subsequent payment of more than $1.2 million to refund the aggrieved businesses.

“This order bans them from the merchant cash advance business and requires them to return money to the businesses they cheated,” Levine said.  

Why Was RCG Banned From the Merchant Cash Advance Industry?

The FTC alleged that RCG Advances (and its owner) operated a merchant cash advance scheme since at least 2015. The agency’s investigation found that RCG deceived small businesses about financing terms and violated federal law in their communications. The alleged misconduct included:

  • Deceiving consumers about personal guarantees – The defendants falsely advertised that their cash advances required no collateral or personal guarantees when their contracts included those requirements.
  • Forcing businesses into confessions of judgment – The defendants required business owners to sign confessions of judgment, which allowed the defendants to obtain an uncontested judgment in the event of default. The complaint alleges that the defendants illegally used these confessions of judgment to seize assets improperly.
  • Providing less funding than promised – Businesses received thousands of dollars less in funding than promised due to undisclosed fees, despite the defendants’ marketing promises of “no upfront fees.”
  • Threatening businesses – The defendants allegedly made threatening calls if business owners did not make payments.

The FTC’s Enforcement Action Against RCG Advances

The court order permanently bans RCG from the business financing and debt collection industries. In addition, RCG must vacate any judgments against their former customers and release any liens against their property. Finally, the defendants must pay more than $2.7 million in refunds to businesses harmed by their actions. The FTC’s enforcement action follows a similar court order against RAM Capital Funding, LLC in January 2022, as we previously reported (here).

The Takeaway

The FTC continues to crack down on unscrupulous merchant cash advance providers. Despite the enhanced regulatory scrutiny, businesses that rely on these alternative funding products for working capital should be aware of the risks. And if your business is struggling under the terms of an MCA agreement, contact an experienced debt relief specialist who can help reconcile your merchant cash advance.