There probably isn’t a day when Canadian business owners and financial managers don’t hear about factoring and accounts receivable financing as a method of financing their business in Canada. Despite its growing popularity and, we can say, relative importance in the Canadian business financing marketplace this financing mechanism is still somewhat understood.

What information do business owners need to know in order to assess if factoring, also known as invoice discounting, is a viable transaction? Also, are there mistakes and pitfalls to be avoided when considering this financing strategy?

Let’s examine the answers to some of those questions. You can be forgiven for trying to figure out why factoring has increased in prominence from a time when no one had almost ever heard of it! The answer to that popularity is more simply and obvious than you might think, and its simply that Canadian chartered banks are finding it increasingly more difficult to fund accounts receivable (and inventory of course) to the extent that their customers need this financing.

When you have a situation where the actual need for financing is acute, and the benefits and flexibility seems significant it is not hard to see the rise in popularity of such a financing mechanism.

First of all, 99% of the time, factoring provides your firm with a greater level of borrowing based on your accounts receivable levels. Quite of 90-100% of you’re A/R under 90 days can be financed.

So is it all good news? Not necessarily, as we are always meeting with clients that have chosen the wrong type of funding or factoring, and, even worse, find them locked into contracts they cannot get out of. That is uncomfortable for any size firm as you can imagine.

As with any newer type of financing the playing field is complex. You can be forgiven for not knowing how many factor firms are out there, how they run, what their own limitations are, and, even to a certain extent, do they in fact themselves have the funding to survive, let along finance your firm. For that reason we cannot over emphasize the need to work with a credible, experienced and trusted professional in this area.

Lets talk about some of the nuances, we can call them potential ‘pitfalls ‘also, of picking the wrong factoring partner. For a starter if you choose a firm who itself is not well capitalized, as we said, you might find that the financing commitments made to you cannot be honored. Canadian business has never had to think that the Canadian chartered banks could be ‘out of money ‘but the Canadian landscape is somewhat littered with small and medium sized factor firms that do not have the financial wherewithal to support their funding commitments in all places. That just re – enforces our idea that a trusted industry expert will guide you to the best partner for your firm.

Other issues, again, we can call them pitfalls, to look for include:

- being locked into a contract

- having the total factoring cost, or pricing, not reflected properly in your term sheet

- advance rates which don’t make sense relative to the price you are paying for discounting invoices

- excessive notification and intrusion with your customers, which is very prevalent in the U.S. model of factoring (Many Canadian factor firms are branches of U.S. firms)

Many startup companies believe that they do not need a lawyer to help them with their business dealings. In the early stages, this may be true. However, as time goes on and your company grows, you will find yourself in situations where it is necessary to hire a business lawyer and begin to understand all the many benefits that come with hiring a lawyer for your legal needs.

The most straightforward approach to avoid any future legal issues is to employ a startup lawyer who is well-versed in your state’s company regulations and best practices. In addition, working with an attorney can help you better understand small company law. So, how can a startup lawyer help you in ensuring that your company’s launch runs smoothly?

They Know What’s Best for You

Lawyers that have experience with startups usually have worked in prestigious law firms, and as general counsel for significant corporations.

Their strategy creates more efficient, responsive, and, ultimately, more successful solutions – relies heavily on this high degree of broad legal and commercial knowledge.

They prioritize learning about a clients’ businesses and interests and obtaining the necessary outcomes as quickly as feasible.

Also, they provide an insider’s viewpoint and an intelligent methodology to produce agile, creative solutions for their clients, based on their many years of expertise as attorneys and experience dealing with corporations.

They Contribute to the Increase in the Value of Your Business

Startup attorneys help represent a wide range of entrepreneurs, operating companies, venture capital firms, and financiers in the education, fashion, finance, health care, internet, social media, technology, real estate, and television sectors.

They specialize in mergers and acquisitions as well as working with companies that have newly entered a market. They also can manage real estate, securities offerings, and SEC compliance, technology transactions, financing, employment, entertainment and media, and commercial contracts, among other things.

Focusing on success must include delivering the highest levels of representation in resolving the legal and business difficulties confronting clients now, tomorrow, and in the future, based on an unwavering dedication to the firm’s fundamental principles of quality, responsiveness, and business-centric service.

Wrapping Up

All in all, introducing a startup business can be overwhelming. You’re already charged with a host of responsibilities in which you’re untrained as a business owner. Legal problems are notoriously difficult to solve, and interpreting “legalese” is sometimes required. Experienced business lawyers know these complexities and can help you navigate them to avoid stumbling blocks.

Although many company owners wait until the last minute to deal with legal issues, they would benefit or profit greatly from hiring an experienced startup lawyer even before they begin. Reputable startup lawyers can give essential legal guidance, assist entrepreneurs in avoiding legal hazards, and improve their prospects of becoming a successful company.

This startling figure comes from a recent review of the financial advice offered from the big four banks by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC).

Even more startling: 10% of advice was found to leave investors in an even worse financial position.

Through a “vertically integrated business model”, Commonwealth Bank, National Australia Bank, Westpac, ANZ and AMP offer ‘in house’ financial advice, and collectively, control more than half of Australia’s financial planners.

It’s no surprise ASIC’s review found advisers at these banks favoured financial products that connected to their parent company, with 68% of client’s funds invested in ‘in house’ products as oppose to external products that may have been on the firms list.

Why the banks integrated financial advice model is flawed

It’s hard to believe the banks can keep a straight face and say they can abide by the duty for advisers to act absolutely in the best interests of a client.

Under the integrated financial advice model, there are layers of different fees including adviser fees, platform fees and investment management fees adding up to 2.5-3.5%

The typical breakdown of fees is usually as follows: an adviser charge of 0.8% to 1.1%, a platform fee of between 0.4% and 0.8%, and a managed fund fee of between 0.7% and 2.1%. These fees are not only opaque, but are sufficiently high to limit the ability of the client to quickly earn real rates of return.

Layers of fees placed into the business model used by the banks means there is not necessarily an incentive for the financial advice arm to make a profit, because the profits can be made in the upstream parts of the supply chain through the banks promoting their own products.

This business model, however, is flawed, and cannot survive in a world where people are demanding greater accountability for their investments, increased transparency in relation to fees and increased control over their investments.

It is noteworthy that the truly independent financial advisory firms in Australia that offer separately managed accounts have done everything in their power to avoid using managed funds and keep fee’s competitive.

The banks have refused to admit their integrated approach to advice is fatally flawed. When the Australian Financial Review approached the Financial Services Council (FSC), a peak body that represents the ‘for-profit’ wealth managers, for a defence if the layered fee arrangements, a spokesman said no generalisations could be made.

There are fundamental flaws in the advice model, and it will be interesting to see what the upcoming royal commission into banking will do to change some of the contentious issues surround integrated financial advice.

Many financial commentators are calling for a separation of financial advice attached to banks, with obvious bias and failure to meet the best interests of clients becoming more apparent.

Chris Brycki, CEO of Stockspot, says “investors should receive fair and unbiased financial advice from experts who will act in the best interests of their client. What Australians currently get is product pushing from salespeople who are paid by the banks.”

Brycki is calling for structural reform to fix the problems caused by the dominant market power of the banks to ensure that consumers are protected, advisers are better educated and incentives are aligned.

Stockspot’s annual research into high-fee-charging funds shows thousands of customers of banks are being recommended bank aligned investment products despite the potential of more appropriate alternatives being available.