Guaranteed Low Prices and Interest: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
 
(23 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Discounts==
==Payments in Advance, Future Contracts (Poskin)==
# Usually it is considered a rabbinic prohibition of taking interest to have a two tiered system in which the buyer could either pay a lower price now and receive the merchandise or can get the merchandise now and only pay later but at a higher price. <ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 173:7, The Laws of Ribbis p. 132, [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/900500/rabbi-hershel-schachter/dinei-ribbis/ Rav Hershel Schachter (Dinei Ribbis min 40)]</ref>
#Generally it is forbidden to sell something for cheaper when the buyer pays in advance. This is also called a future contract of a commodity.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7</ref>
# It is common in some businesses to require a deposit when a customer places a sale to ensure that the seller follows through with the sale. It is permitted for the seller to charge a lower price to the buyer who makes a deposit  since the seller’s intent in requiring a deposit isn’t to charge interest but to ensure that the sale takes place. <ref>The Laws of Ribbis p. 133</ref>
# It is forbidden to pay in advance for the later delivery of a commodity since it is possible that the price of the commodity will rise. The two ways to permit this is if the seller has the commodity already or the marketplace price is already fixed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1</ref>
# It is forbidden to pay a camp an early bird special or discounted price if you pay early.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/900500/rabbi-hershel-schachter/dinei-ribbis/ Rav Hershel Schachter (Dinei Ribbis approx min 40)]</ref>
# If the price of the commodity drops the buyer can renegotiate his part of the deal and buy it for cheaper.<Ref>Mishna Bava Metsia 72b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:7</ref>
# It is forbidden to pay for a sefer in advance before the printer published the sefer.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/900500/rabbi-hershel-schachter/dinei-ribbis/ Rav Hershel Schachter (Dinei Ribbis approx min 40)]</ref>
# If a person is making a down payment for later delivery of a commodity in a permitted fashion the buyer can not benefit from the sale in other ways. Therefore if there would be storage costs upon the seller the buyer would have to pay for those.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch 175:5. Rosh Bava Metsia 5:9 writes that one can't benefit from the downpayment and so the buyer needs to accept any depreciation because of the storage from the time of the payment until delivery.</ref>
# Using advanced discounted payments for a yeshiva or non-profit tzedaka organization is permitted since this is only a rabbinic form of interest.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/900500/rabbi-hershel-schachter/dinei-ribbis/ Rav Hershel Schachter (Dinei Ribbis approx min 40)]</ref>
# A person can borrow money in order to repay it with commodity later if he actually has that commodity.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7</ref>
===Buying on Credit===
# You can buy gourds that are small in the field when they’ll ripen even if the price is cheaper when you pay now.<ref>Tosfot 64a s.v. ma says that you could buy wine from the vineyard even though it isn’t produced yet as long as you don’t specify how much and just buy everything. Also once the grapes are small it is permitted to buy the wine that will be produced later. That’s similar to buying gourds when they ripen if they’re now small (64a). However, the Nemukei Yosef 43b disagrees on both points. It is forbidden to buy the wine from the vineyard even if you don’t specify an amount since it isn’t produced yet. Also, since no one buys unripe grapes even when they’re unripe it isn’t like they’re relevant to allow buying wine that is produced from them. However, gourds are sometimes sold unripe. Rama 173:10 accepts Nemukei Yosef.</ref>
#Generally it is forbidden<ref>Rambam Malveh Vloveh 8:1 clarifies that it is only rabbinically forbidden to charge more for buying on credit since it is presented as a sale not a loan. Shach 173:4 agrees.</ref> to charge someone extra for buying on credit.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 65a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:1</ref>
# If you specify that if the price goes up then it is an investment and if it goes down it is a loan, that is invalid and is considered a loan with ribbit.<ref>Tosfot b"m 54a s.v iy explains that since a person accepted the achrayut of the money it is certainly a loan.</ref>
====Undetermined Price (Tarsha)====
# If an item doesn't have a fixed price then one can charge more for it when the buyer pays later than the delivery date. The reason is that since there's no established price the seller can set the price of the item at the higher price that the buyer will pay later. However, if there is a market price that is known<ref>Tosfot b"m 63b, Rosh b"m 5:22</ref> or the seller specifies a price for the item if one wanted to pay now and another price for buying on credit it is forbidden.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 65a</ref> Therefore, having a two tiered pricing system for buying regularly and buying on credit is interest and forbidden between two Jews.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:1</ref>
#Even when there's no clear price, the market hasn't established a price, and the seller didn't specify a price, the seller can only increase the price a little. There is a dispute as to this amount:
## Some say that the seller can only raise it to an amount that one could expect the price to rise by the time of the payment date. For example, if it is known that in the rainy season the price of umbrellas rise, and the price of umbrellas weren't fixed in the market, then one could have someone pay the price of the rainy season even though the umbrellas were bought in the dry season and they were delivered then. One couldn't charge a higher rate that wouldn't be expected to be the price of the market. We are strict for this opinion.<ref>Baal Hatrumot 46:4:30 citing Ramban 65a s.v. amar, Rabbi Akiva Eiger 173:1, Shach 173:5, Chelkat Binyamin 173:28</ref>
## An alternate opinion to the first one is that the seller can charge up to the price that the market sometimes surges to when some event occurs if that event happens on a frequent basis.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 173:28 citing the Sama 173:30 based on Rama 173:1</ref>
## Some say that the seller can raise it up to 20 percent above the range of prices in the market. If this is a stringency we follow this opinion.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 173:28</ref>
# If something doesn't have a clear price and the market price fluctuates frequently even if there is currently a market price it is considered eligible for the leniency of charging more for buying on credit as long as the seller doesn't specify a price for purchasing it up front.<ref>Chavot Daat 173:3, Chelkat Binyamin 173:31</ref>
# If the price isn't clear and sometimes is sold for one price when sold in the market and another price when sold at a private home, it is permitted to charge a higher price when selling it at the private home even if the buyer is buying on credit.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:2</ref>
====Limitation on Tarsha====
# If the buyer's intention is purely to buy the item on credit in order to sell it immediately for a cheaper value that is considered a prohibited since it as though the cheaper price is stipulated as the value of the loan and yet he agreed to repay a higher amount.<ref>The Ritva b"m 65a cited by Bedek Habayit 173 writes that if someone purchases a commodity on credit it is permitted if the price isn't clear. However, if the buyer immediately sells it for less it shows that the loan obligated him to pay more than the value of the item and is interest. Chatom Sofer YD 137 follows the Ritva and writes that one can't bring a proof from Shulchan Aruch 163:3 or Taz 163:6 who imply otherwise since they didn't have the Ritva.</ref>
====Prepayments to Reduce Cost====
# A buyer and seller agreed upon a price for buying on credit and the sale was validated with a complete and formal acquisition. Then they renegotiate that if the buyer pays right away he doesn't have to pay as much that is permitted.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch 173:3</ref>


===Payments in Advance===
==Has a Position of that Commodity (Yesh Lo)==
#Generally it is forbidden to sell something for cheaper when the buyer pays in advance.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7</ref>
# If the seller of the commodity already has the commodity at the time of the transaction it is permitted. Since the seller has the commodity at the beginning we can view the transaction as though he sold the commodity immediately for the fair marketplace price.<ref>Mishna Bava Metsia 60b, Rav Oshiya on 63b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1</ref> Even though they didn't formally have the buyer acquire that commodity at the beginning of the sale since this is only rabbinic interest it is permitted.<ref>Rashi writes that once money is paid the seller can't back out and if he does he is cursed with a Mi Shepara. However, the buyer didn't make a formal [[kinyan]] but it isn't necessary since this is only rabbinic interest. Bet Yosef 163:1, Taz 163:3, and Shach 163:3 cite this Rashi.</ref>
====Yesh Lo====
# The seller has to have the full quantity of the commodity to fulfill his end of the deal at the time of the transaction for this leniency to apply.<ref>Rambam Malveh Vloveh 10:6, Ritva b"m 63a s.v. veshma mina, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1. Chelkat Binyamin 163:7 clarifies that even though the Rabbenu Yerucham was lenient even if the seller only had some of the commodity we follow the Shulchan Aruch.</ref> It isn't similar to the rules of seah bseah since this is considered a sale and not a loan. Therefore, it is necessary for the seller to sell his commodity to the buyer and having part of the commodity is insufficient, whereas for a loan, it is possible to view it as though the borrower lent out his commodity multiple times since something that he lent out remains in his property.<ref>Shach 163:2 and Taz 163:2</ref>
# The seller is believed to say that he has the commodity he is transacting.<Ref>Rama 163:1</ref>
# This leniency is specific to where the seller has the commodity and doesn't extend to where the seller has cash with which he could use to buy the commodity.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 163:1. The Rosh b"m 5:7 implies that it is sufficient for the seller to have cash. Bet Yosef 163:1 argues that this is a mistake and obviously it is necessary to have the commodity and cash is insufficient. The Tiferet Shmuel 5:1 and Pilpula Charifta 5:7:30 agree. Maharam Shif 63a s.v. haashri presents an approach to explain the Rosh if he actually meant that money is sufficient. Taz 163:4 argues that the Rashi, Tur, and Rosh hold that money is sufficient but decides that we should be strict. Gra 163:1 points out that the Mordechai and Hagahot Ashri in fact do have this leniency even if one just has cash. He also concludes that the Rambam thinks it is necessary to have the commodity and not just money.</ref>
# It is permitted to charge a lower price than the marketplace price if the seller has the commodity at the time of the transaction. This isn't similar to relying on the leniency of Yatza Hashaar.<ref>Tosfot Bava Metsia 63b s.v. vamar, Ramban b"m 46a, Shulchan Aruch 173:7</ref>
# If the seller has the entire quantity of the product that he is selling and the buyer is prepaying it is permitted to charge a lower price for the commodity.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7</ref>
# If the seller has the entire quantity of the product that he is selling and the buyer is prepaying it is permitted to charge a lower price for the commodity.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7</ref>
====Undetermined Price====
# If a seller has the entire volume of the commodity that he is selling he can sell it with a down payment and deliver later and even offer a discounted price.
# If the seller has the commodity but it isn't fully processed as long as it is only one or two steps away from being processed it is considered like he has the commodity.<ref>Rav in Bava Metsia 74a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:4</ref>
# Pesika with Yesh Lo one can even charge a price that is evidently cheaper for the early payment, however, when it isn't completely Yesh Lo but the item is almost ready one do pesika but only at the fair price at the time of the sale.<ref>Ri (Tosfot b"m 63b s.v. vamar), Shach 175:7, Chelkat Binyamin 175:39</ref> Some allow charging a cheaper price with Yesh Lo even if it isn't ready as long as it is only one or two steps away from being processed.<ref>Rashi 72b s.v. posek, Gra 175:5</ref>
# Once there is an established price there is no prohibition to pay now for future delivery of a commodity since it is like a sale.<ref>The Gemara Bava Metsia 63b explains that once there is a fixed price in the market it is permitted since it is not considered a benefit to the buyer as he could have bought it at that time. Also, since there's a marketplace price it is reasonably possible for the supplier to buy it and in which case there is no interest because it is simply a sale. In essence it is like the leniency of Yesh Lo (Rashi 63b s.v. itnihu, 72b s.v. ein lavin).</ref> According to Ashkenazim, if the price generally doesn't change for a few days then it is considered an established price. According to Sephardim, if the price generally doesn't change for two to three months then it is considered an established price.<ref>Chelket Binyamin 175:4-5. Rabbi Yochanan in Gemara Bava Metsia 72b states that the establishment of the price of the city marketplace is insufficient, it needs to be established in the great metropolis central markets. However, Rava on 63b according to Tosfot 63b s.v uposkim thinks that a city marketplace price is sufficient. Rif 34b thinks that Rava agrees with Rabbi Yochanan as does the Rambam Malveh Vloveh 9:4. However, the Rosh b"m 5:7 and Tur 175:1 are lenient like Tosfot. Shulchan Aruch follows the Rif and Rambam, while the Rama follows the Tosfot and Rosh.</ref>
# A price is considered established even if there's a range of prices as long as it is reasonable that it is possible to be able to get the item in local stores at the price that they used for the futures sale (pesika).<ref>Chelket Binyamin 175:7</ref>
# Pesika is only permitted when the price in the market is established for the quantity that one is purchasing. However, if the price is set for buying in bulk one can't use that when buying a future of individual items.<ref>Chavot Yair 189, Pitchei Teshuva 175:1, Chelket Binyamin 175:12. Even though the Chavot Yair writes that this is applicable to Yesh Lo as well, see the [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=849&st=&pgnum=212 Yagel Yakov 175] who questions this based on Shach 175:7. He answers based on the Peni Yehoshua b"m 63a s.v. Bpirush Rashi s.v. Yesh Lo that there's an idea of forbidden changing the price when there's yesh lo if it is intentionally a delayed sale. Peni Yehoshua himself explains that Rashi thinks one can't charge a cheaper price even though it is yesh lo if it was bought with a loan and not originally cash.</ref>
# Pesika is permitted if it is done for a Talmid Chacham and it is evident that the money isn't needed by the supplier and the purchaser could have asked for it as a favor each time and instead it was done up front for convenience then it is permitted since it isn't for the time-value of money.<Ref>Chavot Yair 189, Pitchei Teshuva 175:2, Chelkat Binyamin 175:12</ref>
#Some say that if the item is readily available in stores, such as fruit or vegetables that are in season, silverware, kitchen ware etc, it is considered Yatza Hashaar even though the price fluctuates.<ref>Shevet Halevi 3:109 holds that the dollar in Israel is considered like peirot but still is permitted to be borrowed because it is like Yatza Hashaar since it is accessible anywhere. In his opinion anything which is accessible anywhere is considered Yatza Hashaar even if the price fluctuates. Torat Ribbit 10:4 applies the Shevet Halevi who was discussing seah bseah to the laws of poskin al hapeirot.</ref> This opinion is contested.<ref> Torat Ribbit 19:5 quotes many poskim who argue with the Shevet Halevi including the Brit Yehuda ch. 18 fnt. 15, 20:13, Kitzur Dinei Ribbit of Rav Shternbuch 3:2, 4:6, and Klala Dribita Intro n. 5.</ref>
# Yatza Hashaar only applies if the specific item being bought has an established price and not if there's a similar product or raw material which is made into the product with an established price.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 72b, Rambam Malveh Vloveh 9:4, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:2-3. What emerges from the Maggid Mishna Malveh Vloveh 9:4 is that for old grain and new grain that have separate prices and the price of the old grain is established, Rashi allows stipulating for old grain while the Rambam doesn't allow until it is a uniform fixed price for old and new grain. Also, if there's low quality mixed grains and pure grain and the pure grain has a fixed price one can still stipulate for the more expensive price before there's an established price.</ref>
===Yesh Lo when the Item Naturally Matures===
# If someone buys a certain amount of quantity of a commodity and it will mature naturally such as if someone bought gourds that were growing it is permitted for him to pay in advance even though when the gourds mature they would be more expensive.<ref>Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:8</ref> The seller should then make sure to give him from the crop that he had when they arranged the sale.<ref>Hagahot Mordechai, Shach, and Taz. Chelkat Binyamin 173:112 writes that the Hagahot Mordechai doesn't mean that it is necessary to designate which very specific gourds he is going to sell, it is just necessary to say from his current crop he is going to sell and not going to buy others.</ref> As to the details of responsibility and insurance see footnote.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 173:111 describes that most poskim hold that the mechanism here is a sale and as such it isn't the responsibility of the seller to buy others from the market if these ones spoil. If they were to do that it would be like poskin, stipulating to buy a future of a commodity, which is only permitted when the seller owns the product which isn't the case here. However, in the Biurim he writes that most rishonim indicate that even using the mechanism of pesika to have the seller responsible to ensure the commodity even if he has to buy more from the market. He says that one can rely on this lenient view.</ref>
# This leniency to advance cash to buy unripe produce only applies if it is normal for it to be sold in the market at that stage.<ref>Rama Y.D. 173:10 citing the Nemukei Yosef</ref> If it isn't normal for it to be sold that way then it is forbidden to pay less for buying it in advance. For example, one may not speculate and buy a vineyard of unripe grapes or grapevines for when they will ripen.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:10-11, Taz 173:16</ref>
 
==Marketplace Price Fixed (Yatza Hashaar)==
# If the price of the marketplace is fixed it is permitted to pay in advance for the later delivery of a commodity. The reason is since the marketplace price is fixed it is possible for the seller to purchase the commodity immediately with the funds of the buyer. Therefore, it is as though the commodity is already in the position of the seller.<ref>Mishna Bava Metsia 72b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:1. Milveh Hashem 1:9:27 has a lengthy piece discussing the reasons why having a fixed market price is reason to permit. One reason is that of Rashi 62b and 63b and Rivash 306 that since the seller could have bought the commodity it is like he has them. Alternatively, from the Gemara bava Metsia 63b it seems that the reason is that since the buyer didn't have to buy and get a delayed delivered and could have bought and received it today he didn't gain anything from this transaction. Milveh Hashem concludes that Rashi's reason has a basis and is supported by the Bet Yosef even though it is challenged by the Rashba b"m 72b.</ref>
# This leniency works independent of the leniency of the seller owning the commodity (Yesh Lo).<Ref>Shulchan Aruch 163:1. See Gra 163:3 who cites Rashi who disagrees and requires both where the original sale starting with a loan.</ref>
# It is forbidden for the seller to charge less than the marketplace price since the buyer is paying in advance, even though the marketplace price is fixed.<ref>Shach 163:4 writes that the leniency of Yatza Hashaar when the contract was set up with a loan doesn't allow charging more than the marketplace price. He is writing this to answer the doubt of the Prisha. Shulchan Aruch 175:1 and 173:7 clarify this point that when using the leniency of Yatza Hashaar one must charge only that price and not a lower price.</ref>
#A product that is price regulated by the government is considered to have a fixed price such that it would be permitted to pay upfront for a discount.<ref>Milveh Hashem 1:9:27</ref>
 
==Undetermined Price==
# If there is no fixed price in the market for an item it is permitted to pay for it in advance and have it delivered later.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 65a, Tosfot b"m 63b s.v. vamar, Rama 173:7</ref><ref>Rama 173:7 says you can do poskin on parah or talit even ein lo. That’s based on Tosfot 63b s.v. vamar that says if there’s no shuma then we’re not calling it agar natar we’re calling it tarsha. But what about the fact it might go up on its own like poskin al hapeirot?
# If there is no fixed price in the market for an item it is permitted to pay for it in advance and have it delivered later.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 65a, Tosfot b"m 63b s.v. vamar, Rama 173:7</ref><ref>Rama 173:7 says you can do poskin on parah or talit even ein lo. That’s based on Tosfot 63b s.v. vamar that says if there’s no shuma then we’re not calling it agar natar we’re calling it tarsha. But what about the fact it might go up on its own like poskin al hapeirot?
* Bear Hagolah 173:18 and Tiferet Lmoshe on Shach 173:18 answer that fruit will have a market price if not now then at some later point, but a cow will never. Bear Hagolah and Tiferet Lmoshe are slightly different. Bear Hagolah says that there's no concern it'll go up in price because the seller can give the buyer a slightly cheaper cow. Chelkat Binyamin fnt. 173:349 thinks that this reasoning of the Bear Hagolah isn't precise. However, the Tiferet Lmoshe says that there's no concern it'll go up in price since the price isn't establish it never appears as interest. Chida in Birkei Yosef 173 sides with the Bear Hagolah. This approach is supported by many achronim including Shaar Deah 8, Chachmat Adam 139:4, Or Same'ach b"m 64a s.v. bs"a, Avnei Nezer YD 210:4, and Bet Meir on Taz 173:12 cited by Mesivta Yalkut Biurim b"m 63b p. 60.
* Bear Hagolah 173:18 and Tiferet Lmoshe on Shach 173:18 answer that fruit will have a market price if not now then at some later point, but a cow will never. Bear Hagolah and Tiferet Lmoshe are slightly different. Bear Hagolah says that there's no concern it'll go up in price because the seller can give the buyer a slightly cheaper cow. Chelkat Binyamin fnt. 173:349 thinks that this reasoning of the Bear Hagolah isn't precise. However, the Tiferet Lmoshe says that there's no concern it'll go up in price since the price isn't establish it never appears as interest. Chida in Birkei Yosef 173 sides with the Bear Hagolah. This approach is supported by many achronim including Shaar Deah 8, Chachmat Adam 139:4, Or Same'ach b"m 64a s.v. bs"a, Avnei Nezer YD 210:4, and Bet Meir on Taz 173:12 cited by Mesivta Yalkut Biurim b"m 63b p. 60.
Line 32: Line 42:
* Rav Chaim Soloveitchik (on shas n. 75 cited by Mesivta Yalkut Mefarshim b"m 63b p. 60) explains that once the commodity is promised to the supplied even though he doesn't own it it is partially yesh lo and we're not concerned about the price fluctuation.
* Rav Chaim Soloveitchik (on shas n. 75 cited by Mesivta Yalkut Mefarshim b"m 63b p. 60) explains that once the commodity is promised to the supplied even though he doesn't own it it is partially yesh lo and we're not concerned about the price fluctuation.
* Chelkat Binyamin 173:108 concludes that one can be lenient like the Bear Hagolah's approach and generally give a prepayment to receive more if the price of the item isn't readily determined and isn't going to become readily determined by people.</ref> Even so if the seller specifies that if you pay in advance there is one price and a higher price when buying later it is forbidden.<ref>Rama 173:7</ref> Additionally, if the price difference clearly indicates that it is because of interest it is problematic. The amount that is considered a small amount and not indicative of interest depends on the type of merchandise and the market. If it frequently is on sale then having a prepayment for that sale price is permitted since it doesn't look like there's a cheaper early price because of interest.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 173:110</ref>
* Chelkat Binyamin 173:108 concludes that one can be lenient like the Bear Hagolah's approach and generally give a prepayment to receive more if the price of the item isn't readily determined and isn't going to become readily determined by people.</ref> Even so if the seller specifies that if you pay in advance there is one price and a higher price when buying later it is forbidden.<ref>Rama 173:7</ref> Additionally, if the price difference clearly indicates that it is because of interest it is problematic. The amount that is considered a small amount and not indicative of interest depends on the type of merchandise and the market. If it frequently is on sale then having a prepayment for that sale price is permitted since it doesn't look like there's a cheaper early price because of interest.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 173:110</ref>
====Subterfuges====
 
==Subterfuges==
# It is forbidden for the perspective lender to counter the request of a loan with a subterfuge of having the lender borrow a commodity to then resell it to the lender for a cheaper price. Since the borrower originally requested a loan the borrower may not sell the commodity for a cheaper price when when the price is unclear in the marketplace.<ref>Taz 163:6</ref>
# It is forbidden for the perspective lender to counter the request of a loan with a subterfuge of having the lender borrow a commodity to then resell it to the lender for a cheaper price. Since the borrower originally requested a loan the borrower may not sell the commodity for a cheaper price when when the price is unclear in the marketplace.<ref>Taz 163:6</ref>
====Yesh Lo when the Item Naturally Matures====
 
# If someone buys a certain amount of quantity of a commodity and it will mature naturally such as if someone bought gourds that were growing it is permitted for him to pay in advance even though when the gourds mature they would be more expensive.<ref>Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:8</ref> The seller should then make sure to give him from the crop that he had when they arranged the sale.<ref>Hagahot Mordechai, Shach, and Taz. Chelkat Binyamin 173:112 writes that the Hagahot Mordechai doesn't mean that it is necessary to designate which very specific gourds he is going to sell, it is just necessary to say from his current crop he is going to sell and not going to buy others.</ref> As to the details of responsibility and insurance see footnote.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 173:111 describes that most poskim hold that the mechanism here is a sale and as such it isn't the responsibility of the seller to buy others from the market if these ones spoil. If they were to do that it would be like poskin, stipulating to buy a future of a commodity, which is only permitted when the seller owns the product which isn't the case here. However, in the Biurim he writes that most rishonim indicate that even using the mechanism of pesika to have the seller responsible to ensure the commodity even if he has to buy more from the market. He says that one can rely on this lenient view.</ref>
==Buying All of the Producer's Product==
# This leniency to advance cash to buy unripe produce only applies if it is normal for it to be sold in the market at that stage.<ref>Rama Y.D. 173:10 citing the Nemukei Yosef</ref> If it isn't normal for it to be sold that way then it is forbidden to pay less for buying it in advance. For example, one may not speculate and buy a vineyard of unripe grapes or grapevines for when they will ripen.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:10-11, Taz 173:16</ref>
====Buying All of the Producer's Product====
# Even if the producer doesn't have the product available it is permitted to make an advanced payment for all of the producer's product since there is risk involved and it is considered an investment as opposed to a loan.<ref>Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:9. The example of the Gemara and Shulchan Aruch is a person selling all of the milk he will get from his cows, sheering from his sheep, or honey from his bees in one day. The Gemara explains that this isn't permitted based on the factor of yesh lo or the factor that naturally the product is produced like an immature gourd because there's nothing tangible from which the milk is created at the time of the sale which the buyer can acquire. Shach 173:21 and Taz 173:21 cite the gemara.</ref>
# Even if the producer doesn't have the product available it is permitted to make an advanced payment for all of the producer's product since there is risk involved and it is considered an investment as opposed to a loan.<ref>Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:9. The example of the Gemara and Shulchan Aruch is a person selling all of the milk he will get from his cows, sheering from his sheep, or honey from his bees in one day. The Gemara explains that this isn't permitted based on the factor of yesh lo or the factor that naturally the product is produced like an immature gourd because there's nothing tangible from which the milk is created at the time of the sale which the buyer can acquire. Shach 173:21 and Taz 173:21 cite the gemara.</ref>
# It is permitted to buy a calf and advance the cash and only collect the cow later if the buyer assumes responsibility if the cow dies or depreciates after he pays the money.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:10</ref>
# It is permitted to buy a calf and advance the cash and only collect the cow later if the buyer assumes responsibility if the cow dies or depreciates after he pays the money.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:10</ref>


==Future Contracts of Commodities==
==Repaying a Loan with a Future in Commodities==
# It is forbidden to pay in advance for the later delivery of a commodity since it is possible that the price of the commodity will rise. The two ways to permit this is if the seller has the commodity already or the marketplace price is already fixed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1</ref>
# If the price of the commodity drops the buyer can renegotiate his part of the deal and buy it for cheaper.<Ref>Mishna Bava Metsia 72b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:7</ref>
===Marketplace Price Fixed (Yatza Hashaar)===
# If the price of the marketplace is fixed it is permitted to pay in advance for the later delivery of a commodity. The reason is since the marketplace price is fixed it is possible for the seller to purchase the commodity immediately with the funds of the buyer. Therefore, it is as though the commodity is already in the position of the seller.<ref>Mishna Bava Metsia 72b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:1</ref>
# This leniency works independent of the leniency of the seller owning the commodity (Yesh Lo).<Ref>Shulchan Aruch 163:1. See Gra 163:3 who cites Rashi who disagrees and requires both where the original sale starting with a loan.</ref>
# It is forbidden for the seller to charge less than the marketplace price since the buyer is paying in advance, even though the marketplace price is fixed.<ref>Shach 163:4 writes that the leniency of Yatza Hashaar when the contract was set up with a loan doesn't allow charging more than the marketplace price. He is writing this to answer the doubt of the Prisha. Shulchan Aruch 175:1 and 173:7 clarify this point that when using the leniency of Yatza Hashaar one must charge only that price and not a lower price.</ref>
===Has a Position of that Commodity (Yesh Lo)===
# If the seller of the commodity already has the commodity at the time of the transaction it is permitted. Since the seller has the commodity at the beginning we can view the transaction as though he sold the commodity immediately for the fair marketplace price.<ref>Mishna Bava Metsia 60b, Rav Oshiya on 63b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1</ref> Even though they didn't formally have the buyer acquire that commodity at the beginning of the sale since this is only rabbinic interest it is permitted.<ref>Rashi writes that once money is paid the seller can't back out and if he does he is cursed with a Mi Shepara. However, the buyer didn't make a formal [[kinyan]] but it isn't necessary since this is only rabbinic interest. Bet Yosef 163:1, Taz 163:3, and Shach 163:3 cite this Rashi.</ref>
# The seller has to have the full quantity of the commodity to fulfill his end of the deal at the time of the transaction for this leniency to apply.<ref>Rambam Malveh Vloveh 10:6, Ritva b"m 63a s.v. veshma mina, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1. Chelkat Binyamin 163:7 clarifies that even though the Rabbenu Yerucham was lenient even if the seller only had some of the commodity we follow the Shulchan Aruch.</ref> It isn't similar to the rules of seah bseah since this is considered a sale and not a loan. Therefore, it is necessary for the seller to sell his commodity to the buyer and having part of the commodity is insufficient, whereas for a loan, it is possible to view it as though the borrower lent out his commodity multiple times since something that he lent out remains in his property.<ref>Shach 163:2 and Taz 163:2</ref>
# The seller is believed to say that he has the commodity he is transacting.<Ref>Rama 163:1</ref>
# This leniency is specific to where the seller has the commodity and doesn't extend to where the seller has cash with which he could use to buy the commodity.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 163:1. The Rosh b"m 5:7 implies that it is sufficient for the seller to have cash. Bet Yosef 163:1 argues that this is a mistake and obviously it is necessary to have the commodity and cash is insufficient. The Tiferet Shmuel 5:1 and Pilpula Charifta 5:7:30 agree. Maharam Shif 63a s.v. haashri presents an approach to explain the Rosh if he actually meant that money is sufficient. Taz 163:4 argues that the Rashi, Tur, and Rosh hold that money is sufficient but decides that we should be strict. Gra 163:1 points out that the Mordechai and Hagahot Ashri in fact do have this leniency even if one just has cash. He also concludes that the Rambam thinks it is necessary to have the commodity and not just money.</ref>
# It is permitted to charge a lower price than the marketplace price if the seller has the commodity at the time of the transaction. This isn't similar to relying on the leniency of Yatza Hashaar.<ref>Tosfot Bava Metsia 63b s.v. vamar, Ramban b"m 46a, Shulchan Aruch 173:7</ref>
 
===Repaying a Loan with a Future in Commodities===
# When a person purchases a commodity at a future date by making an advanced case payment there are two possible leniencies: if the seller has the commodity or if the marketplace price is fixed. However, if the original transaction is a result of a loan that the seller owed to the buyer and he is using that loan to purchase a future of commodities this transaction can only be permitted when the seller owns the commodity.<ref>Bava Metsia 63a, Shulchan Aruch 163:1. Rabba in b"m 62b and Rav Oshiya on 63a explain that when a person pays the lender with a commodity at a future date there is a concern for ribbit since the price of the commodity might rise. This problem isn’t solved by the fact that there is an established market price since the borrower wouldn’t be able to buy the commodity with the pre-existing loan. Therefore, if the borrower wants to pay with a commodity at a later date and there is a concern that the commodity will change prices in between it is forbidden to do so since the transaction began as a loan and he might be repaid more than he lent. This is forbidden even if the price of the commodity is established in the marketplace.</ref> The reason for this distinction is because the leniency of having a marketplace price fixed is that it is possible for the seller to cover his obligation by purchasing the commodity in the marketplace at the time of the transaction. However, if he is doing this transaction as a repayment of a loan that unpaid debt can't possibly be used to buy a commodity in the market.<ref> Shach 163:4, Taz 163:4.  
# When a person purchases a commodity at a future date by making an advanced case payment there are two possible leniencies: if the seller has the commodity or if the marketplace price is fixed. However, if the original transaction is a result of a loan that the seller owed to the buyer and he is using that loan to purchase a future of commodities this transaction can only be permitted when the seller owns the commodity.<ref>Bava Metsia 63a, Shulchan Aruch 163:1. Rabba in b"m 62b and Rav Oshiya on 63a explain that when a person pays the lender with a commodity at a future date there is a concern for ribbit since the price of the commodity might rise. This problem isn’t solved by the fact that there is an established market price since the borrower wouldn’t be able to buy the commodity with the pre-existing loan. Therefore, if the borrower wants to pay with a commodity at a later date and there is a concern that the commodity will change prices in between it is forbidden to do so since the transaction began as a loan and he might be repaid more than he lent. This is forbidden even if the price of the commodity is established in the marketplace.</ref> The reason for this distinction is because the leniency of having a marketplace price fixed is that it is possible for the seller to cover his obligation by purchasing the commodity in the marketplace at the time of the transaction. However, if he is doing this transaction as a repayment of a loan that unpaid debt can't possibly be used to buy a commodity in the market.<ref> Shach 163:4, Taz 163:4.  
* Rashba 62b clarifies that although when discussing seah bseah it is sufficient to have some of the commodity and halachically we consider it as though there were multiple sales using this commodity. However, in the case of a loan that was exchanged for a commodity it remains a loan and in order to permit the potential interest it is essential that it is viewed as a real sale. It is only possible to consider the exchange a real sale if the borrower has the quantity he is offering the lender at the time of the agreement to exchange for the commodity.</ref>
* Rashba 62b clarifies that although when discussing seah bseah it is sufficient to have some of the commodity and halachically we consider it as though there were multiple sales using this commodity. However, in the case of a loan that was exchanged for a commodity it remains a loan and in order to permit the potential interest it is essential that it is viewed as a real sale. It is only possible to consider the exchange a real sale if the borrower has the quantity he is offering the lender at the time of the agreement to exchange for the commodity.</ref>
Line 61: Line 56:
# A person purchased a commodity at a future date by making an advanced cash payment. Later when the commodity is due to be delivered he renegotiated with the seller to exchange the commodity he was supposed to acquire with another commodity for the current value of the commodity he is owed. This transaction according to some is only permitted if the seller owns a position of the second commodity that is sufficient to cover paying out this transaction. However, according to others it is permitted as long there is a fixed marketplace price.<ref>Rif bava metsia 34b, Nemukei Yosef 34b quoting Rabbenu Chananel and Rav Hai Goan, Rashba 62b s.v. vki, and Gra Y.D. 175:10 are lenient. The Rif explains that as long as the initial transaction was a sale in the future of a commodity and not a loan it is permitted to switch over the first commodity to the second even if the borrower doesn’t have the commodity.</ref>
# A person purchased a commodity at a future date by making an advanced cash payment. Later when the commodity is due to be delivered he renegotiated with the seller to exchange the commodity he was supposed to acquire with another commodity for the current value of the commodity he is owed. This transaction according to some is only permitted if the seller owns a position of the second commodity that is sufficient to cover paying out this transaction. However, according to others it is permitted as long there is a fixed marketplace price.<ref>Rif bava metsia 34b, Nemukei Yosef 34b quoting Rabbenu Chananel and Rav Hai Goan, Rashba 62b s.v. vki, and Gra Y.D. 175:10 are lenient. The Rif explains that as long as the initial transaction was a sale in the future of a commodity and not a loan it is permitted to switch over the first commodity to the second even if the borrower doesn’t have the commodity.</ref>


===Stipulations for a Default on a Loan===
==Stipulations for a Default on a Loan==
# It is forbidden for a person to stipulate that if the borrower can't repay his own he must give a certain commodity to the lender for the price of the commodity that it was worth at the time of the loan. Since this transaction was conditionally a loan it must follow the rules of a loan exchanged for a future in commodities.<ref>Bet Yosef 163, Shach 163:4</ref>
# It is forbidden for a person to stipulate that if the borrower can't repay his own he must give a certain commodity to the lender for the price of the commodity that it was worth at the time of the loan. Since this transaction was conditionally a loan it must follow the rules of a loan exchanged for a future in commodities.<ref>Bet Yosef 163, Shach 163:4</ref>
===Future Contracts===
==Future Contracts==
# It is permitted to do a future contract for a commodity or stock when one doesn't buy the commodity now at all and doesn't pay for it but merely pays a margin deposit. That is considered as though one agreed to buy or sell something at a later date and there's no advanced payments.<ref>Ribbit Btachnit Chischon Lkol Yeled p. 33 writes that buying a future contract isn't considered like pesika since it is only an arrangement that one promises to later buy something when the contract is due. The fact that money is paid for the contract in advance is purely a deposit and that is why there is no interest paid for buying a future contract. He cites Mishpat Shalom cm 209 in his support.</ref>
# It is permitted to do a future contract for a commodity or stock when one doesn't buy the commodity now at all and doesn't pay for it but merely pays a margin deposit. That is considered as though one agreed to buy or sell something at a later date and there's no advanced payments.<ref>Ribbit Btachnit Chischon Lkol Yeled p. 33 writes that buying a future contract isn't considered like pesika since it is only an arrangement that one promises to later buy something when the contract is due. The fact that money is paid for the contract in advance is purely a deposit and that is why there is no interest paid for buying a future contract. He cites Mishpat Shalom cm 209 in his support.</ref>


==Purchasing Futures of a Commodity (Poskin Al Hapeirot)==
==Difference between a Future Contract and a Sale==
# A person can borrow money in order to repay it with commodity later if he actually has that commodity.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7</ref>
# You can buy gourds that are small in the field when they’ll ripen even if the price is cheaper when you pay now.<ref>Tosfot 64a s.v. ma says that you could buy wine from the vineyard even though it isn’t produced yet as long as you don’t specify how much and just buy everything. Also once the grapes are small it is permitted to buy the wine that will be produced later. That’s similar to buying gourds when they ripen if they’re now small (64a). However, the Nemukei Yosef 43b disagrees on both points. It is forbidden to buy the wine from the vineyard even if you don’t specify an amount since it isn’t produced yet. Also, since no one buys unripe grapes even when they’re unripe it isn’t like they’re relevant to allow buying wine that is produced from them. However, gourds are sometimes sold unripe. Rama 173:10 accepts Nemukei Yosef.</ref>
# If you specify that if the price goes up then it is an investment and if it goes down it is a loan, that is invalid and is considered a loan with ribbit.<ref>Tosfot b"m 54a s.v iy explains that since a person accepted the achrayut of the money it is certainly a loan.</ref>
===Difference between Pesika and a Sale===
# When buying a future of a commodity the seller must provide the buyer with the quantity specified irrelevant of the price change or if his wares of the commodity spoiled. That isn't considered interest since it isn't clear which commodity was sold to the buyer from the beginning.<ref>Tosfot b"m 64b s.v. hay, Rashba 64a s.v. haylech, Taz 173:18, Chelkat Binyamin 173:146. Tosfot 64b asks what is the difference between buying a barrel of wine which is problematic for interest and pesika? Tosfot explains that in pesika the seller takes all responsibility if it goes down or spoils. Since it wan’t specified which fruit he'd provide it doesn’t look like ribbit, while for a barrel of wine it looks like ribbit since the seller specifies which one.</ref> However, when the seller says he is buying specifically the wine that the seller owns then there's a greater concern of interest because if it spoils and yet the seller delivers good wine it seems that the buyer is benefiting because of his advanced payment. Nonetheless, it is permitted until the time when it is normal for wine to spoil if it was spoiled before it was sold.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 173:146</ref>  
# When buying a future of a commodity the seller must provide the buyer with the quantity specified irrelevant of the price change or if his wares of the commodity spoiled. That isn't considered interest since it isn't clear which commodity was sold to the buyer from the beginning.<ref>Tosfot b"m 64b s.v. hay, Rashba 64a s.v. haylech, Taz 173:18, Chelkat Binyamin 173:146. Tosfot 64b asks what is the difference between buying a barrel of wine which is problematic for interest and pesika? Tosfot explains that in pesika the seller takes all responsibility if it goes down or spoils. Since it wan’t specified which fruit he'd provide it doesn’t look like ribbit, while for a barrel of wine it looks like ribbit since the seller specifies which one.</ref> However, when the seller says he is buying specifically the wine that the seller owns then there's a greater concern of interest because if it spoils and yet the seller delivers good wine it seems that the buyer is benefiting because of his advanced payment. Nonetheless, it is permitted until the time when it is normal for wine to spoil if it was spoiled before it was sold.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 173:146</ref>  
# When the buyer specifies a specific barrel at any time it is problematic and is only permitted if the buyer accepts the fact that if the price increases he will receive less commodity than originally specified.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:13, Chelkat Binyamin 173:146</ref> It is forbidden for the seller to accept the responsibility for the change in price.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:13, Shach 173:24, Taz 173:17. Netivot Moshe on Taz 173:17 explains that essentially the Shach and Taz forbid the buyer to accept responsibility for the change in price and say that they're in disagreement with the Drisha who allowed this. However, the Netivot Moshe argues that the Drisha only allowed the buyer to accept responsibility for the change in price if the seller accepts another responsibility such as if it spoils. Chavot Daat 173:18 holds it is forbidden even in such a case.</ref>
# When the buyer specifies a specific barrel at any time it is problematic and is only permitted if the buyer accepts the fact that if the price increases he will receive less commodity than originally specified.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:13, Chelkat Binyamin 173:146</ref> It is forbidden for the seller to accept the responsibility for the change in price.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:13, Shach 173:24, Taz 173:17. Netivot Moshe on Taz 173:17 explains that essentially the Shach and Taz forbid the buyer to accept responsibility for the change in price and say that they're in disagreement with the Drisha who allowed this. However, the Netivot Moshe argues that the Drisha only allowed the buyer to accept responsibility for the change in price if the seller accepts another responsibility such as if it spoils. Chavot Daat 173:18 holds it is forbidden even in such a case.</ref>
==Return Policies==
# If a seller has a regular return policy in which the buyer can use the item<ref>Even though Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 174:1 which is the basis for this law is discussing real estate, it applies equally to movable items. This is pointed out by Laws of Interest p. 40 and Malveh Hashem 2:10:16</ref> and return it within a certain amount of time<ref>Pitchei Teshuva 174:2 cites Bet Efraim YD 42 who contemplated the question of whether a sale that was on condition of return for a certain period of time if it would mature into a full sale after that time expired. He concludes that it isn't a complete sale either way.</ref> or forever that is considered interest. Since the buyer has paid already and in the event that he returns it the sale is voided then we view the purchase money as a loan. Once the buyer has already used the item once and benefited from it if the seller returns him all his money the buyer is receiving interest upon his loan. This can be solved with one of two ways:<ref>Laws of Interest p. 40</ref>
## The language of the return policy should clearly state that if someone wants to return an item within a certain period of time the seller will buy it back. This language makes it evident that the original sale was complete and never voided even in the event that the buyer wants to return it.<ref>Chavot Daat 174:1, Machaneh Efraim 13, Nodeh Beyehuda 2:75, and Kereti 168:10 and 18. Pitchei Teshuva 174:1 cites Nodeh Beyehuda. Har Tzvi YD 139 disagrees with the Chavot Daat because it is contradicted by the Ritva 63a. The dispute in essence is whether the language that the original sale be a complete sale and then later it should be sold back completely avoids interest or perhaps language isn't sufficient if the transaction as a whole results in a situation of interest and the Torah understands it to be a case of a loan. Chelkat Binyamin 174:7 cites many poskim on both sides and concludes that one who is lenient like the Chavot Daat has what to rely upon. Laws of Interest p. 40 also concludes that way. Horah Brurah 174:4 and Malveh Hashem 2:10:16 are strict. Brit Yehuda 28:8 cites the dispute but in fnt. 22 he writes that majority of poskim are strict. However, he cites the Mahara Sason 49 who is lenient when they specify that the original sale was complete as long as it is up to the buyer to decide whether or not to return it and in that case the original sale was a sale.</ref>
## The seller specifies that the buyer can't return it before a certain period of time.<ref>Sama CM 207:11</ref>
## Accoring to most poskim one can rely on the first method. According to others one can rely on the second method. Ideally a person would use both languages to be strict for both sides.<ref>Laws of Interest p. 41</ref>
# Some poskim hold that since generally the fact that the seller lets the buyer use the product is merely in order to interest him in order buying it and there's no time-value of money because of the fact that the seller had the buyer's money in the meantime it is permitted with whatever language they use. However, even according to this opinion if it is a large sale and the time-value of money does play a role and the seller is interested in using the money of the buyer between the time of the sale and the return then it is problematic.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 174:3. He cites Chut Shani ch. 13 and Kuntres Kitzur Dinei Ribbit Hametzuyim 9:5 to support this approach.</ref>
# If someone sells a field or any product on condition that the seller can buy it back when he wants to that isn't a sale, rather it is considered a loan.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 65b, Rambam Malveh Vloveh 6:5, Rashba 3:435, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 174:1 </ref> Therefore, it is forbidden for the buyer to use the field or product. Doing so would be either Biblical interest or rabbinic interest.<reF>Shulchan Aruch 174:1 based on Rambam Malveh Vloveh 6:5 write that it is Biblical interest to eat the fruit of a field that was sold conditionally. Shach 174:1 writes that those who hold that eating the fruit of a mashkon is only rabbinic interest would say the same in this case. See however, Rambam Malveh Vloveh 6:5-7 and Even Haezel 6:4 s.v. vheneh biyarnu who seem to imply otherwise. Taz 174:1 writes that those who think that interest that is conditional upon someone's choice, ''Sad Echad Bribbit'', is rabbinic would deem this rabbinic as well.</ref>
#After the original sale if the buyer decides on his own violation to let the seller buy it back, he can do so and he can even grant that right to the seller with an acquisition. That wouldn't invalidate the original sale and the buyer would be permitted to use that product.<ref>Rashba (Teshuvot Chadashot 1:85), Shulchan Aruch 174:2</ref>
==Discounted for Subscriptions==
# A Jewish journal or magazine which offers a discount for those who purchase a subscription in advance should present it as the price for a year or half a year and not that it is the price for paying in advance. A newspaper which uses the money for investments should offer the subscriptions with a heter iska.<ref>Malveh Hashem 1:9:40</ref>


==Sources==
==Sources==
<references/>
<references/>
[[Category:Ribbit]]
[[Category:Ribbit]]

Latest revision as of 01:58, 30 November 2020

Payments in Advance, Future Contracts (Poskin)

  1. Generally it is forbidden to sell something for cheaper when the buyer pays in advance. This is also called a future contract of a commodity.[1]
  2. It is forbidden to pay in advance for the later delivery of a commodity since it is possible that the price of the commodity will rise. The two ways to permit this is if the seller has the commodity already or the marketplace price is already fixed.[2]
  3. If the price of the commodity drops the buyer can renegotiate his part of the deal and buy it for cheaper.[3]
  4. If a person is making a down payment for later delivery of a commodity in a permitted fashion the buyer can not benefit from the sale in other ways. Therefore if there would be storage costs upon the seller the buyer would have to pay for those.[4]
  5. A person can borrow money in order to repay it with commodity later if he actually has that commodity.[5]
  6. You can buy gourds that are small in the field when they’ll ripen even if the price is cheaper when you pay now.[6]
  7. If you specify that if the price goes up then it is an investment and if it goes down it is a loan, that is invalid and is considered a loan with ribbit.[7]

Has a Position of that Commodity (Yesh Lo)

  1. If the seller of the commodity already has the commodity at the time of the transaction it is permitted. Since the seller has the commodity at the beginning we can view the transaction as though he sold the commodity immediately for the fair marketplace price.[8] Even though they didn't formally have the buyer acquire that commodity at the beginning of the sale since this is only rabbinic interest it is permitted.[9]
  2. The seller has to have the full quantity of the commodity to fulfill his end of the deal at the time of the transaction for this leniency to apply.[10] It isn't similar to the rules of seah bseah since this is considered a sale and not a loan. Therefore, it is necessary for the seller to sell his commodity to the buyer and having part of the commodity is insufficient, whereas for a loan, it is possible to view it as though the borrower lent out his commodity multiple times since something that he lent out remains in his property.[11]
  3. The seller is believed to say that he has the commodity he is transacting.[12]
  4. This leniency is specific to where the seller has the commodity and doesn't extend to where the seller has cash with which he could use to buy the commodity.[13]
  5. It is permitted to charge a lower price than the marketplace price if the seller has the commodity at the time of the transaction. This isn't similar to relying on the leniency of Yatza Hashaar.[14]
  6. If the seller has the entire quantity of the product that he is selling and the buyer is prepaying it is permitted to charge a lower price for the commodity.[15]
  7. If a seller has the entire volume of the commodity that he is selling he can sell it with a down payment and deliver later and even offer a discounted price.
  8. If the seller has the commodity but it isn't fully processed as long as it is only one or two steps away from being processed it is considered like he has the commodity.[16]
  9. Pesika with Yesh Lo one can even charge a price that is evidently cheaper for the early payment, however, when it isn't completely Yesh Lo but the item is almost ready one do pesika but only at the fair price at the time of the sale.[17] Some allow charging a cheaper price with Yesh Lo even if it isn't ready as long as it is only one or two steps away from being processed.[18]
  10. Once there is an established price there is no prohibition to pay now for future delivery of a commodity since it is like a sale.[19] According to Ashkenazim, if the price generally doesn't change for a few days then it is considered an established price. According to Sephardim, if the price generally doesn't change for two to three months then it is considered an established price.[20]
  11. A price is considered established even if there's a range of prices as long as it is reasonable that it is possible to be able to get the item in local stores at the price that they used for the futures sale (pesika).[21]
  12. Pesika is only permitted when the price in the market is established for the quantity that one is purchasing. However, if the price is set for buying in bulk one can't use that when buying a future of individual items.[22]
  13. Pesika is permitted if it is done for a Talmid Chacham and it is evident that the money isn't needed by the supplier and the purchaser could have asked for it as a favor each time and instead it was done up front for convenience then it is permitted since it isn't for the time-value of money.[23]
  14. Some say that if the item is readily available in stores, such as fruit or vegetables that are in season, silverware, kitchen ware etc, it is considered Yatza Hashaar even though the price fluctuates.[24] This opinion is contested.[25]
  15. Yatza Hashaar only applies if the specific item being bought has an established price and not if there's a similar product or raw material which is made into the product with an established price.[26]

Yesh Lo when the Item Naturally Matures

  1. If someone buys a certain amount of quantity of a commodity and it will mature naturally such as if someone bought gourds that were growing it is permitted for him to pay in advance even though when the gourds mature they would be more expensive.[27] The seller should then make sure to give him from the crop that he had when they arranged the sale.[28] As to the details of responsibility and insurance see footnote.[29]
  2. This leniency to advance cash to buy unripe produce only applies if it is normal for it to be sold in the market at that stage.[30] If it isn't normal for it to be sold that way then it is forbidden to pay less for buying it in advance. For example, one may not speculate and buy a vineyard of unripe grapes or grapevines for when they will ripen.[31]

Marketplace Price Fixed (Yatza Hashaar)

  1. If the price of the marketplace is fixed it is permitted to pay in advance for the later delivery of a commodity. The reason is since the marketplace price is fixed it is possible for the seller to purchase the commodity immediately with the funds of the buyer. Therefore, it is as though the commodity is already in the position of the seller.[32]
  2. This leniency works independent of the leniency of the seller owning the commodity (Yesh Lo).[33]
  3. It is forbidden for the seller to charge less than the marketplace price since the buyer is paying in advance, even though the marketplace price is fixed.[34]
  4. A product that is price regulated by the government is considered to have a fixed price such that it would be permitted to pay upfront for a discount.[35]

Undetermined Price

  1. If there is no fixed price in the market for an item it is permitted to pay for it in advance and have it delivered later.[36][37] Even so if the seller specifies that if you pay in advance there is one price and a higher price when buying later it is forbidden.[38] Additionally, if the price difference clearly indicates that it is because of interest it is problematic. The amount that is considered a small amount and not indicative of interest depends on the type of merchandise and the market. If it frequently is on sale then having a prepayment for that sale price is permitted since it doesn't look like there's a cheaper early price because of interest.[39]

Subterfuges

  1. It is forbidden for the perspective lender to counter the request of a loan with a subterfuge of having the lender borrow a commodity to then resell it to the lender for a cheaper price. Since the borrower originally requested a loan the borrower may not sell the commodity for a cheaper price when when the price is unclear in the marketplace.[40]

Buying All of the Producer's Product

  1. Even if the producer doesn't have the product available it is permitted to make an advanced payment for all of the producer's product since there is risk involved and it is considered an investment as opposed to a loan.[41]
  2. It is permitted to buy a calf and advance the cash and only collect the cow later if the buyer assumes responsibility if the cow dies or depreciates after he pays the money.[42]

Repaying a Loan with a Future in Commodities

  1. When a person purchases a commodity at a future date by making an advanced case payment there are two possible leniencies: if the seller has the commodity or if the marketplace price is fixed. However, if the original transaction is a result of a loan that the seller owed to the buyer and he is using that loan to purchase a future of commodities this transaction can only be permitted when the seller owns the commodity.[43] The reason for this distinction is because the leniency of having a marketplace price fixed is that it is possible for the seller to cover his obligation by purchasing the commodity in the marketplace at the time of the transaction. However, if he is doing this transaction as a repayment of a loan that unpaid debt can't possibly be used to buy a commodity in the market.[44]
  2. A person purchased a commodity at a future date with a preexisting loan that the seller owes him. As explained this is only permitted if the seller has that commodity. If later at the time of the delivery date they renegotiate that the seller will exchange the first commodity with another one, it is only permitted if the seller has the second commodity.[45]
  3. A person purchased a commodity at a future date by making an advanced cash payment. Later when the commodity is due to be delivered he renegotiated with the seller to exchange the commodity he was supposed to acquire with another commodity for the current value of the commodity he is owed. This transaction according to some is only permitted if the seller owns a position of the second commodity that is sufficient to cover paying out this transaction. However, according to others it is permitted as long there is a fixed marketplace price.[46]

Stipulations for a Default on a Loan

  1. It is forbidden for a person to stipulate that if the borrower can't repay his own he must give a certain commodity to the lender for the price of the commodity that it was worth at the time of the loan. Since this transaction was conditionally a loan it must follow the rules of a loan exchanged for a future in commodities.[47]

Future Contracts

  1. It is permitted to do a future contract for a commodity or stock when one doesn't buy the commodity now at all and doesn't pay for it but merely pays a margin deposit. That is considered as though one agreed to buy or sell something at a later date and there's no advanced payments.[48]

Difference between a Future Contract and a Sale

  1. When buying a future of a commodity the seller must provide the buyer with the quantity specified irrelevant of the price change or if his wares of the commodity spoiled. That isn't considered interest since it isn't clear which commodity was sold to the buyer from the beginning.[49] However, when the seller says he is buying specifically the wine that the seller owns then there's a greater concern of interest because if it spoils and yet the seller delivers good wine it seems that the buyer is benefiting because of his advanced payment. Nonetheless, it is permitted until the time when it is normal for wine to spoil if it was spoiled before it was sold.[50]
  2. When the buyer specifies a specific barrel at any time it is problematic and is only permitted if the buyer accepts the fact that if the price increases he will receive less commodity than originally specified.[51] It is forbidden for the seller to accept the responsibility for the change in price.[52]

Sources

  1. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7
  2. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1
  3. ↑ Mishna Bava Metsia 72b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:7
  4. ↑ Shulchan Aruch 175:5. Rosh Bava Metsia 5:9 writes that one can't benefit from the downpayment and so the buyer needs to accept any depreciation because of the storage from the time of the payment until delivery.
  5. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7
  6. ↑ Tosfot 64a s.v. ma says that you could buy wine from the vineyard even though it isn’t produced yet as long as you don’t specify how much and just buy everything. Also once the grapes are small it is permitted to buy the wine that will be produced later. That’s similar to buying gourds when they ripen if they’re now small (64a). However, the Nemukei Yosef 43b disagrees on both points. It is forbidden to buy the wine from the vineyard even if you don’t specify an amount since it isn’t produced yet. Also, since no one buys unripe grapes even when they’re unripe it isn’t like they’re relevant to allow buying wine that is produced from them. However, gourds are sometimes sold unripe. Rama 173:10 accepts Nemukei Yosef.
  7. ↑ Tosfot b"m 54a s.v iy explains that since a person accepted the achrayut of the money it is certainly a loan.
  8. ↑ Mishna Bava Metsia 60b, Rav Oshiya on 63b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1
  9. ↑ Rashi writes that once money is paid the seller can't back out and if he does he is cursed with a Mi Shepara. However, the buyer didn't make a formal kinyan but it isn't necessary since this is only rabbinic interest. Bet Yosef 163:1, Taz 163:3, and Shach 163:3 cite this Rashi.
  10. ↑ Rambam Malveh Vloveh 10:6, Ritva b"m 63a s.v. veshma mina, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:1. Chelkat Binyamin 163:7 clarifies that even though the Rabbenu Yerucham was lenient even if the seller only had some of the commodity we follow the Shulchan Aruch.
  11. ↑ Shach 163:2 and Taz 163:2
  12. ↑ Rama 163:1
  13. ↑ Shulchan Aruch 163:1. The Rosh b"m 5:7 implies that it is sufficient for the seller to have cash. Bet Yosef 163:1 argues that this is a mistake and obviously it is necessary to have the commodity and cash is insufficient. The Tiferet Shmuel 5:1 and Pilpula Charifta 5:7:30 agree. Maharam Shif 63a s.v. haashri presents an approach to explain the Rosh if he actually meant that money is sufficient. Taz 163:4 argues that the Rashi, Tur, and Rosh hold that money is sufficient but decides that we should be strict. Gra 163:1 points out that the Mordechai and Hagahot Ashri in fact do have this leniency even if one just has cash. He also concludes that the Rambam thinks it is necessary to have the commodity and not just money.
  14. ↑ Tosfot Bava Metsia 63b s.v. vamar, Ramban b"m 46a, Shulchan Aruch 173:7
  15. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:7
  16. ↑ Rav in Bava Metsia 74a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:4
  17. ↑ Ri (Tosfot b"m 63b s.v. vamar), Shach 175:7, Chelkat Binyamin 175:39
  18. ↑ Rashi 72b s.v. posek, Gra 175:5
  19. ↑ The Gemara Bava Metsia 63b explains that once there is a fixed price in the market it is permitted since it is not considered a benefit to the buyer as he could have bought it at that time. Also, since there's a marketplace price it is reasonably possible for the supplier to buy it and in which case there is no interest because it is simply a sale. In essence it is like the leniency of Yesh Lo (Rashi 63b s.v. itnihu, 72b s.v. ein lavin).
  20. ↑ Chelket Binyamin 175:4-5. Rabbi Yochanan in Gemara Bava Metsia 72b states that the establishment of the price of the city marketplace is insufficient, it needs to be established in the great metropolis central markets. However, Rava on 63b according to Tosfot 63b s.v uposkim thinks that a city marketplace price is sufficient. Rif 34b thinks that Rava agrees with Rabbi Yochanan as does the Rambam Malveh Vloveh 9:4. However, the Rosh b"m 5:7 and Tur 175:1 are lenient like Tosfot. Shulchan Aruch follows the Rif and Rambam, while the Rama follows the Tosfot and Rosh.
  21. ↑ Chelket Binyamin 175:7
  22. ↑ Chavot Yair 189, Pitchei Teshuva 175:1, Chelket Binyamin 175:12. Even though the Chavot Yair writes that this is applicable to Yesh Lo as well, see the Yagel Yakov 175 who questions this based on Shach 175:7. He answers based on the Peni Yehoshua b"m 63a s.v. Bpirush Rashi s.v. Yesh Lo that there's an idea of forbidden changing the price when there's yesh lo if it is intentionally a delayed sale. Peni Yehoshua himself explains that Rashi thinks one can't charge a cheaper price even though it is yesh lo if it was bought with a loan and not originally cash.
  23. ↑ Chavot Yair 189, Pitchei Teshuva 175:2, Chelkat Binyamin 175:12
  24. ↑ Shevet Halevi 3:109 holds that the dollar in Israel is considered like peirot but still is permitted to be borrowed because it is like Yatza Hashaar since it is accessible anywhere. In his opinion anything which is accessible anywhere is considered Yatza Hashaar even if the price fluctuates. Torat Ribbit 10:4 applies the Shevet Halevi who was discussing seah bseah to the laws of poskin al hapeirot.
  25. ↑ Torat Ribbit 19:5 quotes many poskim who argue with the Shevet Halevi including the Brit Yehuda ch. 18 fnt. 15, 20:13, Kitzur Dinei Ribbit of Rav Shternbuch 3:2, 4:6, and Klala Dribita Intro n. 5.
  26. ↑ Gemara Bava Metsia 72b, Rambam Malveh Vloveh 9:4, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:2-3. What emerges from the Maggid Mishna Malveh Vloveh 9:4 is that for old grain and new grain that have separate prices and the price of the old grain is established, Rashi allows stipulating for old grain while the Rambam doesn't allow until it is a uniform fixed price for old and new grain. Also, if there's low quality mixed grains and pure grain and the pure grain has a fixed price one can still stipulate for the more expensive price before there's an established price.
  27. ↑ Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:8
  28. ↑ Hagahot Mordechai, Shach, and Taz. Chelkat Binyamin 173:112 writes that the Hagahot Mordechai doesn't mean that it is necessary to designate which very specific gourds he is going to sell, it is just necessary to say from his current crop he is going to sell and not going to buy others.
  29. ↑ Chelkat Binyamin 173:111 describes that most poskim hold that the mechanism here is a sale and as such it isn't the responsibility of the seller to buy others from the market if these ones spoil. If they were to do that it would be like poskin, stipulating to buy a future of a commodity, which is only permitted when the seller owns the product which isn't the case here. However, in the Biurim he writes that most rishonim indicate that even using the mechanism of pesika to have the seller responsible to ensure the commodity even if he has to buy more from the market. He says that one can rely on this lenient view.
  30. ↑ Rama Y.D. 173:10 citing the Nemukei Yosef
  31. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:10-11, Taz 173:16
  32. ↑ Mishna Bava Metsia 72b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 175:1. Milveh Hashem 1:9:27 has a lengthy piece discussing the reasons why having a fixed market price is reason to permit. One reason is that of Rashi 62b and 63b and Rivash 306 that since the seller could have bought the commodity it is like he has them. Alternatively, from the Gemara bava Metsia 63b it seems that the reason is that since the buyer didn't have to buy and get a delayed delivered and could have bought and received it today he didn't gain anything from this transaction. Milveh Hashem concludes that Rashi's reason has a basis and is supported by the Bet Yosef even though it is challenged by the Rashba b"m 72b.
  33. ↑ Shulchan Aruch 163:1. See Gra 163:3 who cites Rashi who disagrees and requires both where the original sale starting with a loan.
  34. ↑ Shach 163:4 writes that the leniency of Yatza Hashaar when the contract was set up with a loan doesn't allow charging more than the marketplace price. He is writing this to answer the doubt of the Prisha. Shulchan Aruch 175:1 and 173:7 clarify this point that when using the leniency of Yatza Hashaar one must charge only that price and not a lower price.
  35. ↑ Milveh Hashem 1:9:27
  36. ↑ Gemara Bava Metsia 65a, Tosfot b"m 63b s.v. vamar, Rama 173:7
  37. ↑ Rama 173:7 says you can do poskin on parah or talit even ein lo. That’s based on Tosfot 63b s.v. vamar that says if there’s no shuma then we’re not calling it agar natar we’re calling it tarsha. But what about the fact it might go up on its own like poskin al hapeirot?
    • Bear Hagolah 173:18 and Tiferet Lmoshe on Shach 173:18 answer that fruit will have a market price if not now then at some later point, but a cow will never. Bear Hagolah and Tiferet Lmoshe are slightly different. Bear Hagolah says that there's no concern it'll go up in price because the seller can give the buyer a slightly cheaper cow. Chelkat Binyamin fnt. 173:349 thinks that this reasoning of the Bear Hagolah isn't precise. However, the Tiferet Lmoshe says that there's no concern it'll go up in price since the price isn't establish it never appears as interest. Chida in Birkei Yosef 173 sides with the Bear Hagolah. This approach is supported by many achronim including Shaar Deah 8, Chachmat Adam 139:4, Or Same'ach b"m 64a s.v. bs"a, Avnei Nezer YD 210:4, and Bet Meir on Taz 173:12 cited by Mesivta Yalkut Biurim b"m 63b p. 60.
    • Shach 173:17 answers that parah is yatzah shaar in that the factors necessary to determine its price like per pound is shaar kavuah. See Rabbenu Heshel of Cracow 173:3, the teacher of the Shach, who seems to deliberate between the approach of the Bear Hagolah and Shach.
    • Taz 173:12 argues on rama and says its only if it didn’t go up.
    • Chavot Daat 173:11 there’s no shiybud haguf here if you give them a specific item, but there is for the general fruit which you can give them any fruit.
    • Rav Chaim Soloveitchik (on shas n. 75 cited by Mesivta Yalkut Mefarshim b"m 63b p. 60) explains that once the commodity is promised to the supplied even though he doesn't own it it is partially yesh lo and we're not concerned about the price fluctuation.
    • Chelkat Binyamin 173:108 concludes that one can be lenient like the Bear Hagolah's approach and generally give a prepayment to receive more if the price of the item isn't readily determined and isn't going to become readily determined by people.
  38. ↑ Rama 173:7
  39. ↑ Chelkat Binyamin 173:110
  40. ↑ Taz 163:6
  41. ↑ Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:9. The example of the Gemara and Shulchan Aruch is a person selling all of the milk he will get from his cows, sheering from his sheep, or honey from his bees in one day. The Gemara explains that this isn't permitted based on the factor of yesh lo or the factor that naturally the product is produced like an immature gourd because there's nothing tangible from which the milk is created at the time of the sale which the buyer can acquire. Shach 173:21 and Taz 173:21 cite the gemara.
  42. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:10
  43. ↑ Bava Metsia 63a, Shulchan Aruch 163:1. Rabba in b"m 62b and Rav Oshiya on 63a explain that when a person pays the lender with a commodity at a future date there is a concern for ribbit since the price of the commodity might rise. This problem isn’t solved by the fact that there is an established market price since the borrower wouldn’t be able to buy the commodity with the pre-existing loan. Therefore, if the borrower wants to pay with a commodity at a later date and there is a concern that the commodity will change prices in between it is forbidden to do so since the transaction began as a loan and he might be repaid more than he lent. This is forbidden even if the price of the commodity is established in the marketplace.
  44. ↑ Shach 163:4, Taz 163:4.
    • Rashba 62b clarifies that although when discussing seah bseah it is sufficient to have some of the commodity and halachically we consider it as though there were multiple sales using this commodity. However, in the case of a loan that was exchanged for a commodity it remains a loan and in order to permit the potential interest it is essential that it is viewed as a real sale. It is only possible to consider the exchange a real sale if the borrower has the quantity he is offering the lender at the time of the agreement to exchange for the commodity.
  45. ↑ Mishna Bava Metsia 60b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 163:2
  46. ↑ Rif bava metsia 34b, Nemukei Yosef 34b quoting Rabbenu Chananel and Rav Hai Goan, Rashba 62b s.v. vki, and Gra Y.D. 175:10 are lenient. The Rif explains that as long as the initial transaction was a sale in the future of a commodity and not a loan it is permitted to switch over the first commodity to the second even if the borrower doesn’t have the commodity.
  47. ↑ Bet Yosef 163, Shach 163:4
  48. ↑ Ribbit Btachnit Chischon Lkol Yeled p. 33 writes that buying a future contract isn't considered like pesika since it is only an arrangement that one promises to later buy something when the contract is due. The fact that money is paid for the contract in advance is purely a deposit and that is why there is no interest paid for buying a future contract. He cites Mishpat Shalom cm 209 in his support.
  49. ↑ Tosfot b"m 64b s.v. hay, Rashba 64a s.v. haylech, Taz 173:18, Chelkat Binyamin 173:146. Tosfot 64b asks what is the difference between buying a barrel of wine which is problematic for interest and pesika? Tosfot explains that in pesika the seller takes all responsibility if it goes down or spoils. Since it wan’t specified which fruit he'd provide it doesn’t look like ribbit, while for a barrel of wine it looks like ribbit since the seller specifies which one.
  50. ↑ Chelkat Binyamin 173:146
  51. ↑ Gemara Bava Metsia 64a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:13, Chelkat Binyamin 173:146
  52. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 173:13, Shach 173:24, Taz 173:17. Netivot Moshe on Taz 173:17 explains that essentially the Shach and Taz forbid the buyer to accept responsibility for the change in price and say that they're in disagreement with the Drisha who allowed this. However, the Netivot Moshe argues that the Drisha only allowed the buyer to accept responsibility for the change in price if the seller accepts another responsibility such as if it spoils. Chavot Daat 173:18 holds it is forbidden even in such a case.
Retrieved from "http://localhost:80/index.php?title=Guaranteed_Low_Prices_and_Interest&oldid=29054"