Greenbox Capital on Official Panel to Aid Section 1071’s Rollout

October 21, 2020
Article by:

Greenbox Capital WebsiteThis week, Greenbox Capital, the Miami-based alternative finance company known for its MCA and SMB financing, announced they are serving as a Small Entity Representative (SER) to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) as the organization proceeds with the rollout of Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act.

“I am representing, and Greenbox Capital is essentially representing, the industry,” CEO Jordan Fein said. “There are some banks, there’s Funding Circle, but other than that, it’s Greenbox Capital serving in the industry.”

Fein, who founded Greenbox in 2012 and has since facilitated MCAs and business loans across America, Puerto Rico, and Canada, wrote in a press release that it was an honor to be selected to provide feedback on Section 1071.

“Over 2 million businesses across the U.S. are either women or minority-owned,” Fein wrote. “It is vital they can secure funding as easily as non-minority-owned businesses.”

Jordan Fein Greenbox Capital
Jordan Fein, CEO, Greenbox Capital

Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010 in response to the Great Recession. To further protect consumers, the CFPB was born. Section 1071, an amendment to the 1974 Equal Credit Opportunity Act, mandates financial institutions report demographic information to the CFPB. But much was left undefined about how to go about doing that and who would technically be subject to it.

Ultimately, the intent behind the law was to measure potential disparities among factors like the race and gender of applicants. Ten years later, the rollout is finally moving along.

As part of this, the CFPB created a board of firms representing the affected industry, on which Greenbox sits, to ensure the law works with the industry, not against it. The first panel was on October 15, in compliance with the 1996 Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA.)

“They’re going through the SBREFA process, which is a structured process where they have a panel of industry representatives, and they share what they’re planning to do,” Fein said. “They run it by companies like us and we give our opinion and talk about how we think companies will be impacted.”

According to an invitation letter the firms received, they will have until November 9 to respond.

Fein said Greenbox would ensure any suggestions it made would positively impact the industry. Especially during a pandemic, Fein said it is essential to create regulation with firms in mind.

Steve Denis Talks About SBFA Study: APR is a Bad Metric For SMB Loan Transparency

October 19, 2020
Article by:

SBFA GuideIn response to regulatory bills in California and New York that will enforce APR disclosures on small business capital providers, the Small Business Finance Association (SBFA) funded a study by Kingsley-Kleimann to find out if APR is a good metric to use for business loans.

Steve Denis, the Executive director of the SBFA, said his group supported the study because the states should test concepts with actual small business owners before passing regulation. In the NY disclosure bill awaiting signature, Denis said there was no concept testing. Some of the companies that support the bill might not have even read what it stipulates.

“You have a group of companies that are pushing these types of disclosures, for no reason other than their own self-interest,” Denis said. “We’re fine with disclosure, we are all for transparency, but it needs to be done in a way that we believe is meaningful to small business owners.”

In qualitative testing of 24 small business owners and executives who have experience taking commercial loans, the study concluded participants did not understand what APR was. The study found that the total cost of financing model was a better way to understand and compare options for their use.

“As one participant, when asked to define APR, answered: ‘I feel like you are asking a kid, why is the sky blue?’ (Participant 3, NY).” The study concluded, “In other words, [APR] is ever-present yet also inscrutable.”

Kingsley-Kleimann is a research-based organization that studies communication and disclosure for government agencies like the FTC and private or public business. Participants were selected from Califonia and NY. 

Denis said that the findings show what SMB lending companies have already known- Anual Percentage Rate is not a useful metric for short term loans. Many do not know that APR represents the annualized cost of funds for the loan term, with the fees and additional costs included.

“People don’t know what APR is; it confuses them,” Denis said. “They know it’s a metric they should use, but they don’t know why. The APR is such a marketing tool now, it’s not a valuable tool.”

The study showed most respondents thought APR was the same as an interest rate. It’s not.

merchant cash advance APRDenis said using an annualized rate for shorter-term loans or SMB loans that have no ending date worsens the problems. In those cases, firms estimate an APR, and it is inaccurate.

“When you have a merchant cash advance, there’s no term,” Denis said. “So you have to estimate a term, and I mean that is just a recipe for fraud.”

Denis said that the firms supporting California SB1235 and the New York S 5470/A 10118-A disclosure bill and taking credit for writing the laws are the same companies that will suffer under the strict tolerance of an APR rule.

“The companies pushing this, the trade associations pushing it, they like to take credit for writing the bill in California and writing the bill in New York: I don’t even think they’ve read it,” Denis said. “It’s going to subject their own members to potentially millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars in potential liability [fines.]”

The SBFA is not against disclosure by any means, Denis said, but supported other avenues. The trade group believes knowing the total cost of a loan and the cost and timeline of payments will help protect and inform borrowers better than APR. Firms that support the disclosure bill are banking off the positive press, hoping to be seen as pro-consumer protections but forcing APR will make it harder to compare the actual value of loans, Denis said. 

Denis is still optimistic that regulators will work with businesses affected by the incoming legislation. He said the NY legislature and governor’s office, as well as the California Department of Business Oversight, understand the problems of using APR.

“They’re receptive to these arguments, and they know what they’re doing,” Denis said. “The last thing they want to do is pass a bill that’s going to further confuse businesses, especially during a pandemic when businesses are relying on this capital to stay afloat.”

DailyFunder Still #1 Small Business Finance Community

October 14, 2020
Article by:

Daily FunderDailyFunder, the small business finance forum founded by Sean Murray in 2012, continues to be the leading online community for the industry, according to a recent announcement. The forum recently surpassed 10,000 registered members, in addition to logging more than 2 million page views just in 2020 so far.

“The forum has attracted well over a million visitors since inception and users have historically spent longer than 10 minutes on the site in any given session on average,” Murray said.

deBanked’s parent company fully acquired DailyFunder earlier this year. The announcement was featured prominently in deBanked’s January/February 2020 magazine issue. In it, Murray renewed the website’s objective:

“The mission will be to create a great forum for those involved in day-to-day dealmaking,” he said in a Q&A. “How can we provide a platform that enables those in the industry to make more money? That’s the way I look at it. I think if we can provide that type of value, success will follow.”

The FTC’s Power to “Wipe Out” is Under Siege

October 9, 2020
Article by:

ftc office washington dcAs the FTC contemplates how to “wipe out” entire industries, federal courts around the country have recently ruled that the regulator can’t accomplish such a goal under Section 13(b) of the FTC act. That’s the statute the FTC relied on to bring its most recent actions against merchant cash advance companies. It might not have bite.

Under 13(b), the FTC is empowered to bring a lawsuit to obtain an injunction against unlawful activity that is currently occurring or is about to occur. It’s powerful, but very limited. However, for the last several decades, the FTC, with the help of federal courts, has interpreted the statute to mean that it can also force the defendants to “disgorge” with illegally obtained funds.

That’s how the FTC wiped out Scott Tucker and his payday lending empire. In a lawsuit the FTC brought against his companies under 13(b) in 2012, the Court entered a judgment of $1.3 billion against him.

Not so fast, modern legal analysis says. Tucker’s case is being brought before the Supreme Court of the United States to settle once and for all what 13(b) allows for and what it doesn’t.

The momentum does not weigh in the FTC’s favor.

On September 30, the Third Circuit ruled in FTC v AbbVie that the FTC is not entitled to seek disgorgement under 13(b). The Seventh Circuit arrived at a similar conclusion last year in FTC v Credit Bureau Center.

In an interview with NBC, FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra said in August “We’ve started suing some [merchant cash advance companies] and I’m looking for a systemic solution that makes sure they can all be wiped out before they do more damage.”

As the FTC attempts to be more proactive in the area of small business finance, it will be important to monitor what the Supreme Court ultimately decides it can actually accomplish.

Kapitus CEO Speaks on Success of Rating Reaffirmation

October 6, 2020
Article by:

Kapitus WebsiteWhen lending companies faced the tightest squeeze on capital since the great recession, many ran into trouble. Kapitus, having survived 08′, met 20′ with the same discipline that helped them navigate the pandemic.

“Our whole industry was put on a credit watch downgrade, and it’s very exciting that we were upgraded, reaffirmed to the original rating,” Kapitus CEO and founder Andy Reiser said. “Most of the companies, our peers defaulted and went into what’s called rapid amortization and did not make it through to keep their securitization.”

Reiser was happy to report that Kapitus received a rating affirmation from Kroll Bond Rating Agency (KBRA) on Friday. KBRA has removed the Kapitus securities from a Watch Downgrade.

Back in March, the businesses that Kapitus and their competitors funded across the country, faced state mandated shutdowns. Many customers were suddenly unable to make the loan, MCA, or equipment payments that they had been able to make for years.

For lenders that bundled and securitized the loans they made, the value of those loans was called into question.

“WE FOCUSED ON STRONG BUSINESS PRACTICES AND KEEPING THE PORTFOLIO STRONG, AND IT PAID OFF”

On March 30, KBRA placed the ratings of 29 securitizations representing $2.1 billion from 10 SMB lending firms on a “Watch Downgrade” due to the economic downturn.

To overcome the warning, Kapitus reigned in and focused on helping their customers. Reiser cited the addition of Jeff Newman from Citigroup to manage the risk team as an example of how the firm has been focused on funding responsibly for years.

“We focused on strong business practices and keeping the portfolio strong, and it paid off,” Reiser said. “We never stopped, we were not lending at the same velocity that we did pre COVID, but we never had a day that we didn’t fund a new deal.”

Reiser said that during the pandemic’s height, the team took a lot of long nights working on new products. One was a “step renewal” that allowed clients to pay installments and build up to the full payment, to make sure they were not overwhelmed. Kapitus also offered extended periods for their healthcare loans, up to 36 months, Reiser said.

For companies like Kapitus, a questionable rating could lead to a rapid amortization event: a sudden call to liquefy the bonds and give back investor money. For some, an event like this will spell the end: most firms don’t keep hundreds of millions or even billions on hand to give back principals in a moment’s notice.

Reiser said out of the ten securities on credit watch, only one other was reaffirmed, due to a renegotiation of terms that bond investors had to agree on. Kapitus made no negation but was reaffirmed due to the success of their business practice, Reiser said.

The securitization was initially issued for $105 million in June 2018, and expanded to $160 million last December, in three classes with a senior class rating of “A.”

Reiser believes that the pandemic, like the ’08 recessions, will see some consolidation and strong companies prospering in a displaced environment.

“I think COVID will teach a lot of other players that were very aggressive in coming down to this market that it’s not so easy,” Reiser said. “I think some of the banks and the alternative lenders that were more eager to come into this market may not be so aggressive at least for a while.”

Capify CEO David Goldin on New $10 Million Equity Round

September 30, 2020
Article by:

David Goldin HeadshotCapify, a leading international small business lending platform, announced a $10 million equity round this week from a new investment group with vast experience in the alternative lending industry.

“[investors were] diligent seeing Capify, the management team, and the opportunity,” Goldin said. “They thought it was a very good investment, particularly how Capify’s portfolio performed during the pandemic.”

Goldin said the capital is a great “restart of the engine” after the cautious approach the company took to lending at the height of the pandemic. The money is not an equity round from current investors, but rather new capital joining the team.

The funding will be directed toward ramping lending back up and extending business partnerships with firms that serve small businesses, as well as direct and indirect lenders.

“So, hindsight is actually better than 2020 vision; no one in our lifetime has experienced the pandemic,” Goldin said. “No one knew what to expect from a risk profile, so we took the conservative approach.”

That approach was to shut down new loans and focus on servicing its current customers. It was a difficult time for the alternative lending industry veteran, but now Goldin said he sees a great demand for capital.

“This was one of the toughest challenges that I’ve experienced ever as an entrepreneur,” Goldin said. “The result really speaks to Capify as a company. People are willing to make that investment, believing in opportunity ahead and not the current times or the past during the pandemic.”

Goldin said that Capify has always been known for its well-performing portfolio, one of the reasons that in 2019 the firm received a $95 million credit facility from Goldman Sachs’ Merchant Banking Division.

Goldin began working in the fintech industry before the word fintech was even coined; in the early 2000s, he started one of the first MCA companies. Amerimerchant started selling loans and MCAs internationally in the UK and Australia in 2008, then rebranded to Capify in 2015. After leaving the US market in 2017 gained Goldman’s attention last year.

“So now that we have the firepower, we believe there’ll be opportunities in these markets as demand picks up for small business lending,” Goldin said.

The New Largest Merchant Cash Advance in History: $90 million +

September 9, 2020
Article by:

The largest merchant cash advance in history (at $40 million), first publicly disclosed in 2018, has been outdone. On Tuesday, the Receiver in the Par Funding SEC case revealed that its largest customer had outstanding purchased receivables of $91.3 million. The customer is an office and cleaning supply company based on Long Island. The amount is now the largest known merchant cash advance deal in history.

Par’s second largest customer had outstanding purchased receivables of $35 million.

Par’s total receivables are estimated to be $420 million. $228.8 million of it stems from just 10 customers including the two referenced above, according to a recently filed report.

Section 1071 is Back and The CFPB Wants to Know How Much It Will Cost You to Comply

August 25, 2020
Article by:

CFPB LogoAt some point in this century, small business finance companies will be expected to comply with Section 1071 of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that was passed in 2010.

In the wake of the ’08-’09 financial crisis (remember that?!), lawmakers passed the above act that has become colloquially known as Dodd-Frank. Section 1071 gave the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau the authority and the mandate to collect data from small business lenders (and similar companies).

The costs, risks, and challenges with rolling out this law have been discussed on deBanked for 5 years, yet little progress has been made to finally implement it. But it’s starting to move along and the CFPB would now like to know how expensive it will be for businesses to comply.

If you are engaged in small business finance, you should seriously consider submitting a response to their survey. The CFPB is specifically cataloging responses from merchant cash advance companies, fintech lenders, and equipment financiers.

You can start the survey here.