The Legal Ground You’re Standing On
Oregon MCA law: the three facts that shape every option
Every resolution strategy — renegotiation, settlement, defense, refinancing — plays out differently depending on these three pieces of Oregon law. A firm that can’t speak to them isn’t the best firm for a Oregon file.
1Usury limits & the recharacterization question
Oregon's interest statute (ORS 82.010) sets a 9% rate where none is agreed and caps loans of $50,000 or less — including business loans — at the greater of 12% or 5 points above the Federal Reserve discount rate; a lender charging above the cap forfeits all interest and may recover only principal (ORS 82.010(4)). Banks and licensed lenders are exempt (ORS 82.025), and Oregon has no criminal usury statute — the remedy is civil forfeiture. No Oregon statute addresses MCAs specifically, so everything turns on recharacterization: an MCA of $50,000 or less recharacterized as a loan to an Oregon business could fall under the cap and trigger the interest-forfeiture penalty — a meaningful remedy on smaller advances, which is exactly the size range where stacking does its damage.
Sources: ORS 82.010 — rates; interest forfeiture · ORS 82.025 — exemptions · Cullen & Dykman — MCA recharacterization factors
2Confessions of judgment in Oregon
Pre-signed MCA confessions don't fit the rule Oregon governs confessions of judgment by court rule (ORCP 73). Consumer confessions are prohibited outright; commercial confessions are permitted only if the debtor signs a sworn, verified statement executed after the debt became due, and judgment may be entered only in the county where the defendant resides or is found. Because MCA confession clauses are signed at funding — before any default — the pre-signed cognovit-style COJs used in MCA contracts do not fit Oregon's procedure. As elsewhere, the residual risk is a confession validly obtained in another forum arriving by domestication.
Sources: ORCP 73 — judgments by confession
3Commercial financing disclosure: where Oregon stands
Oregon has not enacted a commercial financing disclosure law — the March 2026 Venable survey lists ten enacted states and pending activity only in New Jersey, with Oregon nowhere in it (Oregon's 2025 disclosure legislation concerned motor vehicle installment contracts, not commercial financing). Oregon merchants hold no statutory right to pre-signing cost disclosures: the agreement is the only place the true cost appears, so read it — or have someone who reads them professionally do it — before signing.
Sources: Venable — State Commercial Financing Disclosure Laws (Mar. 2026)
How funders actually enforce here: MCA agreements with Oregon merchants typically select out-of-state courts; a funder holding a sister-state judgment domesticates it under Oregon's Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (ORS 24.105–24.175) by filing an authenticated copy, after which it enforces like an Oregon judgment, subject to notice and stay provisions. Collection proceeds through Oregon's garnishment statutes (ORS 18.600–18.850), reaching bank accounts and other property with statutory exemptions and challenge procedures. Funders also perfect UCC-1 liens filed with the Oregon Secretary of State. Notably, no published Oregon court opinion on MCA recharacterization could be verified — Oregon merchants are working with national doctrine, not local precedent. ORS 24.105 — Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act · ORS 18.600 — garnishment · Oregon Secretary of State — UCC filings and search
