HB 937 creates a new section of Florida law aimed at preventing “predatory loan” structures that are designed to evade the state’s consumer finance lending rules in chapter 516, Florida Statutes. The bill prohibits any person from using a device, scheme, or artifice to get around the chapter’s interest-rate and fee limits, including by arranging or assisting in consumer finance loans that charge more than the law allows, whether the transaction occurs in person or through mail, phone, internet, or other electronic means.
The bill also states that any consumer finance loan made in violation of these anti-evasion rules is void and uncollectible for all principal, fees, interest, charges, and payments. In addition, it expands who may be treated as a “lender” for purposes of the law, even if the person claims to be an agent, service provider, or other intermediary for an exempt entity, when the person has the predominant economic interest in the loan, materially markets or services the loan and has rights to acquire it, or when the overall structure shows an intent to evade chapter 516. The act takes effect July 1, 2025.
Impact
HB 937 would strengthen enforcement of Florida’s consumer finance lending laws by targeting loan arrangements that are structured to avoid statutory rate caps and licensing or regulatory requirements. It would give regulators and courts a clearer basis to treat certain third-party facilitators, brokers, or program operators as lenders when they effectively control the loan or receive the economic benefit, and it would render noncompliant loans unenforceable against borrowers.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text alone and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes, the measure appears to reflect a consumer-protection approach focused on curbing predatory lending and closing loopholes in the consumer finance market. The overall tone of the bill is regulatory and anti-evasion, suggesting support for stronger oversight of high-cost lending practices.
Contention
The main point of contention likely concerns how broadly the bill defines a lender and when a business arrangement is deemed an unlawful evasion of chapter 516. Lenders, fintech platforms, marketplace lenders, and other intermediaries could be affected by the “totality of the circumstances” test and the factors involving economic interest, control of the loan program, and rights to acquire receivables. Supporters would likely view these provisions as necessary to stop rent-a-bank or similar avoidance schemes, while critics may argue they create uncertainty for legitimate lending partnerships and service-provider arrangements.