4 Reasons the SBA Will Not Refinance Your MCA Anymore (And What to Do Instead)

The exit door that ten thousand businesses used last year has been locked from the inside.

On June 1, 2025, the Small Business Administration implemented a change to its Standard Operating Procedures that eliminated the single most accessible institutional remedy for businesses carrying MCA debt. SBA 7(a) loans, the primary loan program for American small businesses, can no longer be used to refinance merchant cash advances or factoring agreements. The prohibition extends to SBA Small loans, SBA Express loans, Export Express loans, and International Trade loans. The change was not widely publicized. It arrived in an updated SOP manual, without a press conference, and affected every business owner in the country carrying MCA debt.

If you are one of them, here is what happened, why it happened, and what options remain.

The SBA Discovered It Was Subsidizing a Cycle

For years, business owners used SBA 7(a) loans to replace MCA obligations. The logic was sound: swap an advance with an effective APR of one hundred fifty percent or higher for an SBA-backed loan at ten to thirteen percent. The monthly payment dropped. The business stabilized. The MCA funders were paid off.

The SBA noticed a pattern. After the refinancing closed and the MCA funders received their payoffs, a significant number of borrowers took on new MCA debt. The cycle repeated: new advances, new daily withdrawals, new cash flow crises. Except now, the borrower also carried an SBA loan.

The default rate on SBA loans rose. The SBA identified MCA refinancing as a contributing factor and determined that its loan program was, in effect, providing temporary relief that recycled into the same debt structure. The SBA's response was blunt: remove the option entirely.

Banks that processed these refinancings reported the pattern to the SBA. The borrowers who re-entered the MCA cycle after refinancing did not do so out of recklessness. They did so because the conditions that drove them to MCA funding in the first place (irregular revenue, limited access to traditional credit, urgent cash needs) persisted after the SBA loan closed. The MCA industry was waiting.

Your MCA Debt Now Counts Against You in SBA Underwriting

The prohibition does not merely prevent refinancing. It changes the underwriting calculus. Existing MCA obligations, which previously could be eliminated through SBA proceeds, now remain on the borrower's balance sheet during the application process. The daily ACH withdrawals reduce your demonstrable cash flow. Your debt service coverage ratio, the metric banks use to determine whether you can afford the SBA loan payment, declines.

In practical terms, a business carrying two or three MCAs may be unable to qualify for an SBA loan at all, even for purposes unrelated to refinancing the MCAs. The MCA debt does not merely prevent its own resolution through SBA financing. It prevents the business from accessing SBA financing for any purpose.

This is the compounding effect the SBA did not intend but produced nonetheless. The policy was designed to stop a cycle. It also closed a door.

The Alternatives Are Narrower But Not Absent

The SBA's prohibition does not eliminate all options for businesses carrying MCA debt. It eliminates the most favorable one. What remains requires more effort, more legal sophistication, and more strategic thinking.

Attorney-negotiated settlement remains available. Funders who would previously have accepted a full payoff through SBA refinancing may now accept a reduced settlement, because the alternative (attempting to collect the full balance from a business that cannot access institutional financing) is less certain than it was before June 2025.

Traditional term loans from banks or credit unions remain available for businesses that can demonstrate repayment capacity. These loans are not subsidized by the SBA and may carry higher rates, but they are not subject to the SBA's MCA prohibition. The challenge is qualification: the same MCA obligations that prevent SBA approval may impair the borrower's creditworthiness for traditional lending.

Legal challenges to the MCA agreements themselves remain available and, in the post-Yellowstone environment, may be the most effective path. If the agreements are reclassified as loans, the total obligation is reduced to a fraction of the factor-rate balance. The reduced amount may be serviceable without refinancing.

And bankruptcy remains available as the remedy of last resort, invoking the automatic stay and permitting restructuring under court supervision.

DEFENSE TEAM SPOTLIGHT

Todd Spodek

Lead Attorney & Founder

Featured on Netflix's "Inventing Anna," Todd Spodek brings decades of high-stakes criminal defense experience. His aggressive approach has secured dismissals and acquittals in cases others deemed unwinnable.

NY Bar Admitted Multi-State Licensed Federal Courts

Meet the Full Team

The Rule Change Makes Legal Review More Important, Not Less

Before June 2025, a business owner carrying MCA debt had two primary options: refinance through the SBA, or challenge the agreements through legal channels. The SBA option was simpler, faster, and required no legal expertise. Many business owners chose it and never examined whether their MCA agreements were enforceable.

Now, the legal channel is the primary channel. The agreements that were never reviewed, because refinancing made review unnecessary, must be reviewed. The reconciliation clauses that were never invoked, because the SBA payoff eliminated the need, must be invoked. The defenses that were never asserted, because the debt was simply replaced, must be asserted.

The SBA's rule change did not create new legal rights. It made the existing legal rights the only path forward for businesses that cannot access institutional financing. And those rights, properly asserted by an attorney who understands MCA litigation, may produce a better outcome than refinancing ever did, because they address the enforceability of the debt rather than merely replacing it.

The first step is a consultation with an attorney who can evaluate your specific agreements in light of the current legal and regulatory environment. That consultation costs nothing. The assessment it produces is, in the absence of SBA refinancing, the most valuable document a business owner carrying MCA debt can obtain.