Hello, Silvia. But I have a little doubt about non-recourse factoring. You mentioned that the repayment responsibility should be the amount that the factoring company will pay. With this example, they paid cu288000, but u recorded cu300000 The “loss on the sale of receivables” is not really a loss – it is a combination of interest charges related to the early receipt of cash and the transfer of default risk to the factor, which could be a more accurate seizure of the same transaction (assuming a factoring premium of 2000 USD), to cover the risk of loss of receivables): Hello Silvia. It is a wonderful job that you have done there. 2000. Please, I would like to have a clarification on factoring with a recourse. In the figure below, you have debited the repayment liability and credited the bank with CU 10,000, where the debt was accumulated and the postman uses the company. If it is not a full refund of the CU288,000 originally received through the following: Debit Refund Liability – CU288.000 and Credit Bank – CU288.000. Then, the difference must be amortized as part of the total loss of debt. That is my thought. Please explain to me. Thank you In the IFRS kit, there is an example of this type of factoring that is solved in Excel files and clearly explained in the video, so please watch it if you are interested! The amount received by the factoring company is recorded as a liability.
Thanks for the excellent explanation. I have a question: should factoring expenses still be recognised as financial charges or could they also be recognised as operating expenses? Because they are connected to exploit traps. I did factoring with a recourse, and in the BS, it`s ammount gross ok. Acc. Financial receivables and liabilities. The GuV on the other side is a matter. Could you lead me to a standard that deals with that? Originally, the industry took physical possession of the goods, provided cash advances to the producer, financed the loan granted to the buyer and ensured the power of the buyer`s credit.  In England, control of the trade thus acquired led in 1696 to an Act of Parliament aimed at attenuating the monopolistic power of the factors. With the development of large companies that have developed their own distribution forces, distribution channels and knowledge of the financial capacity of their customers, the needs for factoring services have been revamped and the sector has become specialized. The sale of the receivable transfers ownership of the receivable to the postman, indicating that the postman obtains all the rights attached to the receivables.
  Accordingly, the receivable becomes the asset of the factor and the factor is entitled to receive payments made by the debtor for the invoice amount, and the crediting asset is free to mortgage or exchange the receivable asset without unreasonable limitations or restrictions.   As a general rule, the debtor is informed of the sale of the receivable and the postman invoices the debtor and invoices all recoveries; However, there is also non-notification factoring in which the customer (seller) collects accounts sold to the postman as the factor`s agent. The agreement is generally confidential, since the debtor is not informed of the assignment of the receivable and the seller of the receivable has the receivable for the factor.  If factoring transfers the receivable “without recourse”, the factor (buyer of the receivable) must bear the loss if the account debtor does not pay the invoice amount.  If factoring transfers the receivable “by way of recourse”, the factor has the right to recover the unpaid amount of the assignor`s (seller)`s invoice.  Returns of goods that may reduce the amount of the extract from the claim are generally the responsibility of the seller and the factor retained is generally the payment to the seller of part of the claim sold (the “holdback claim of the postman”) in order to cover returns related to the materialized receivables until the privilege of returning the goods expires. . . .