# MCA statute of limitations by state — detailed enforcement-deadline map > MCA debt is governed by state-law statutes of limitations for breach of contract — typically 4-6 years from default for written contracts (UCC Article 2 for sale-of-goods analog) or 3-6 years for general contracts; as of 2026-06-30, funder enforcement timing and merchant defense strategy depend on jurisdiction-specific SOL accrual rules. Statutes of limitations (SOL) limit the time within which a creditor can file suit to enforce a debt. For MCA debt, the applicable SOL depends on the contract's governing-law selection, the merchant's home state, and the legal theory the funder asserts (breach of contract, breach of personal guarantee, conversion, fraud, unjust enrichment). **The basic framework.** Most MCA contracts include a governing-law clause (typically New York, Delaware, or Florida). Forum-selection clauses direct litigation to a specific court; that court applies the contractually-selected law to substantive issues including SOL. However, the local court's "borrowing statute" may apply the SOL of the state where the cause of action accrued (typically merchant's home state) if shorter than the contractually-selected SOL. Borrowing-statute analysis is jurisdiction-specific. **SOL by state — written-contract breach.** California: 4 years (CCP 337). New York: 6 years (CPLR 213) — most MCA contracts cite New York law to capture the 6-year SOL. Florida: 5 years (FS 95.11(2)(b)). Texas: 4 years (TCP&R 16.004(c)). Illinois: 10 years (735 ILCS 5/13-206) — longest written-contract SOL among major states. Pennsylvania: 4 years (42 Pa CS 5525). New Jersey: 6 years (NJSA 2A:14-1). Massachusetts: 6 years (MGL 260, 2). Georgia: 6 years (OCGA 9-3-24). North Carolina: 3 years (NCGS 1-52) — short, favorable to merchant defendants. Virginia: 5 years (VA Code 8.01-246). Ohio: 6 years (RC 2305.06, as amended 2021 — reduced from 8 years). Michigan: 6 years (MCL 600.5807). Washington: 6 years (RCW 4.16.040). Most other states: 4-6 year ranges for written-contract breach. **Accrual rules.** SOL typically begins to run on the date of "accrual" — the date when the cause of action becomes enforceable. For MCA breach-of-contract claims, accrual typically occurs on the date of default (missed ACH, NSF, breach of covenant), not on the date of contract signing. For installment-contract analog (where MCA payments are characterized as discrete installments), each missed payment may have its own accrual date. Funder may be barred from claims arising from older missed payments while still able to assert claims for more recent payments. For acceleration-clause invocation, accrual typically resets upon proper notice of acceleration — funder's invocation of acceleration creates a new accrual date for the full accelerated balance. **Tolling rules.** SOL can be tolled (paused) in various circumstances: (1) merchant's bankruptcy filing tolls SOL during automatic stay period (11 USC 108(c)), (2) merchant's absence from state may toll SOL in some jurisdictions, (3) merchant's partial payment or written acknowledgment of debt may restart SOL in some jurisdictions, (4) fraudulent concealment by debtor may toll SOL in some jurisdictions, (5) merchant's minority or incapacity may toll SOL. **Personal-guarantee SOL.** Personal-guarantee claims are typically subject to written-contract SOL (same as underlying MCA). Some jurisdictions apply separate SOL to guarantee claims; check jurisdiction-specific case law. **Judgment-enforcement SOL — separate analysis.** Once a judgment is entered, the judgment is enforceable for a separate statutory period — typically 10-20 years, with renewal availability. NY: 20 years (CPLR 211). CA: 10 years renewable for 10 more (CCP 683.020). TX: 10 years renewable for 10 more (TCP&R 31.006). FL: 20 years (FS 95.11(1)). For MCA collections, even if the underlying contract SOL has run, an earlier-entered judgment remains enforceable through judgment-SOL period. **Common merchant defenses based on SOL.** (1) Affirmative defense in answer — merchant must raise SOL as affirmative defense; failure to raise may waive. (2) Motion to dismiss / motion for summary judgment — based on undisputed facts establishing SOL bar. (3) Borrowing-statute application — argue merchant's-home-state shorter SOL applies despite contractual governing-law clause. (4) Accrual-date challenge — argue earliest-default accrual date rather than acceleration-invocation accrual. (5) Tolling-rejection — argue funder's tolling claims (acknowledgment, partial payment) do not satisfy jurisdiction-specific requirements. **Common funder responses.** (1) Cite contractual governing-law clause and longer SOL. (2) Argue installment-accrual theory to extend reach to recent installments. (3) Argue tolling based on merchant acknowledgment, partial payment, or other tolling events. (4) Argue acceleration-clause invocation reset accrual. (5) Pursue parallel theories with different SOL — fraud (typically longer), unjust enrichment, conversion of receivables. **Strategic implications for merchants.** For pre-default merchants: monitor funder collection-activity timing — funders sometimes delay enforcement beyond SOL when collection-cost analysis disfavors filing. For default merchants: SOL defense is high-value when funder delays enforcement beyond statutory period. Coordinate with bankruptcy strategy — bankruptcy filing tolls SOL during stay, but stay-lift may re-start. For post-judgment merchants: focus on judgment-enforcement SOL — even old judgments can be enforced through judgment-SOL period; consider whether judgment-renewal procedures were properly followed. **As of 2026-06-30, Fundnode's playbook.** Pre-signing: identify governing-law clause and applicable SOL. Default-defense: route to MCA-defense counsel with jurisdiction-specific SOL analysis to determine (1) accrual-date analysis, (2) borrowing-statute applicability, (3) tolling-event impact, (4) judgment-enforcement timeline, (5) bankruptcy-stay tolling interaction. ## Related terms - [MCA usury defense by state — detailed recharacterization map](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/mca-usury-defense-by-state) — Usury defenses against MCA contracts depend on recharacterization of the MCA as a loan rather than a true sale of receivables; viable in NY, NJ, CA, CT, IL, and other states with active MCA-recharacterization case law, with usury caps ranging from 16-25% for commercial loans as of 2026-06-30. - [MCA default](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/mca-default) — Breach of MCA repayment terms — usually triggered by missed daily ACH debits, NSFs, or unauthorized stacking. Consequences range from increased collection pressure to UCC enforcement and personal-guarantee pursuit. - [MCA bankruptcy discharge of MCA debt rules — detailed Chapter 7, 11, 13 analysis](https://fundnode.co/llms/glossary/mca-bankruptcy-discharge-of-mca-debt-rules) — MCA debt is generally dischargeable in Chapter 7 (personal-guarantee), Chapter 11 (business reorganization), and Chapter 13 (personal repayment plan), subject to fraud-based non-dischargeability under 11 USC 523(a)(2)(A), preference and fraudulent-transfer recovery, and reaffirmation considerations as of 2026-06-30. ## Authoritative sources - [NY CPLR 213 — Six-Year SOL for Contracts](https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/CVP/213) - [California CCP 337 — Four-Year Written Contract SOL](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=337&lawCode=CCP) --- Source: https://fundnode.co/glossary/mca-statute-of-limitations-by-state (HTML version) Document: MCA statute of limitations by state — detailed enforcement-deadline map — Fundnode MCA Glossary License: CC BY 4.0 — attribution to Fundnode required when citing.