UCC Document Community

Financial Services

Ask the community...

  • DO post questions about your issues.
  • DO answer questions and support each other.
  • DO post tips & tricks to help folks.
  • DO NOT post call problems here - there is a support tab at the top for that :)

Iowa UCC filing fees keep changing - what are current rates?

Running into confusion with Iowa UCC filing fees and hoping someone can clarify current rates. We're preparing several UCC-1 filings for equipment financing deals and the fee structure seems different than what our office used last year. The Iowa SOS website shows one rate but our regular filing service quoted us something else entirely. Are there different fees for electronic vs paper filings? Also seeing conflicting info about continuation fees vs amendment fees. We've got about 12 filings to submit this month so want to make sure we budget correctly. Anyone dealt with Iowa UCC filing fees recently and can share what they actually paid?

Just to confirm the current rates since there's been some confusion in this thread: Iowa UCC-1 electronic filing is $15 for first debtor, $5 each additional. Paper filing is $20 + $5 each additional. Continuations are $15 electronic, $20 paper. Amendments vary by type but most are $15. Terminations are $10. These are the rates as of January 2025.

0 coins

Good summary. I'm saving this for reference.

0 coins

Appreciate the clarity. The Iowa fee structure is definitely more complex than some other states.

0 coins

Thanks everyone for the detailed breakdown! This is exactly what I needed. Based on the current rates Yara outlined, I'm looking at about $180-240 for my 12 filings depending on debtor counts. The per-debtor pricing definitely adds up but at least now I can budget accurately. Going to check out that fee calculator on the Iowa SOS website and might look into Certana.ai for document verification given the volume we're dealing with. Really appreciate this community sharing real-world experience with Iowa UCC filings!

0 coins

UCC filing washington dc - debtor name exact match requirements?

Running into issues with a UCC filing washington dc situation and wondering if anyone has dealt with debtor name matching requirements. We're securing inventory for a retail chain and the LLC's registered name includes punctuation that doesn't match exactly how they sign contracts. The UCC-1 got kicked back twice already because of name variations. First rejection said 'insufficient debtor name' and second one mentioned 'debtor name does not match exact entity records.' Has anyone successfully navigated the exact match requirements? The collateral schedule is straightforward (all inventory, equipment, accounts receivable) but we can't get past this name verification step. Deadline is approaching fast and we need this perfected to maintain our security interest. Any guidance on the specific formatting requirements would be hugely appreciated.

Update us when you get it resolved! These name matching issues are becoming more common and it would be helpful to know what finally worked for your situation.

0 coins

Will do. Planning to call the Secretary of State office first thing Monday and also try the Certana.ai document checker that was mentioned. Appreciate all the advice!

0 coins

Good luck! The name matching requirements are a pain but once you get the exact format figured out, future filings with that entity should go smoothly.

0 coins

Pro tip from someone who's been burned by this before - if you're working with an LLC, pay special attention to whether "LLC" or "L.L.C." appears in the official name. Many states register them differently, and the periods make a huge difference in the matching algorithm. Also, watch out for "Limited Liability Company" vs "LLC" - some entities use the full phrase in their registration. I've seen filings rejected because someone used "ABC Company, LLC" when the registration was "ABC Company, L.L.C." - literally just the periods caused the rejection. The automated systems are completely unforgiving on this stuff.

0 coins

UCC filing confusion - vehicle subject to security agreement collateral description help

I'm dealing with a tricky situation where I need to file a UCC-1 for a commercial truck that's already subject to a security agreement from last year. The vehicle subject to security agreement language in our new loan docs is throwing me off - do I need to reference the existing lien in my collateral description or can I just describe the truck normally? The debtor is the same but we're a different lender taking a second position. Our legal team says the collateral schedule needs to be super specific but I'm not sure if 'one 2024 Ford F-350 Super Duty pickup truck, VIN 1ABCD23E4FG567890, subject to existing security agreement recorded under UCC filing number 2024-1234567' is too wordy or if I should keep it simple. Anyone dealt with this before? I don't want the SOS to reject it for being unclear.

One more thing to consider - if this is a commercial vehicle make sure you're filing in the right state. Some companies are incorporated in Delaware but operate vehicles in other states and that can affect where you need to file the UCC.

0 coins

Yeah definitely verify the debtor's state of organization. That determines where you file, not where the vehicle is located.

0 coins

This is another thing that document verification tool would catch - it checks jurisdiction requirements along with everything else.

0 coins

I've been handling UCC filings for about 8 years now and you're definitely on the right track keeping it simple. For your collateral description, just go with "2024 Ford F-350 Super Duty pickup truck, VIN 1ABCD23E4FG567890" - that's all you need. The existing lien doesn't need to be mentioned in your description at all. What matters most is getting the debtor name exactly as it appears on your security agreement. I've seen too many filings get rejected or challenged later because of small name variations. Also make sure you're filing in the correct state based on where the debtor entity was formed, not where the vehicle is located. The priority between liens will be determined by filing dates, so focus on getting yours filed correctly rather than worrying about the other lender's paperwork.

0 coins

UCC Article 9 general intangibles classification nightmare - equipment vs intangible collateral

I'm losing my mind over this UCC Article 9 general intangibles issue. We're doing asset-based lending for a tech company and I can't figure out if their proprietary software licenses should be classified as equipment or general intangibles on our UCC-1. The borrower has $2.8M in various software licensing agreements - some are perpetual, others are subscription-based SaaS platforms they resell to customers. Our credit committee is breathing down my neck because the collateral schedule keeps getting kicked back by our compliance team. One lawyer says it's all general intangibles under Article 9, another says the hardware-embedded licenses are equipment. The borrower's existing UCC filings from their previous lender show inconsistent classifications too. We need to file our UCC-1 by Friday or lose the deal. Has anyone dealt with this gray area between equipment and general intangibles? The UCC Article 9 definitions seem to overlap and I'm getting conflicting advice from everyone.

Final thought - document your classification reasoning in your credit file. If questions come up later during audits or workout situations, you'll want to show you considered the Article 9 distinctions carefully.

0 coins

Great advice. Also helps if you need to file amendments later and want to maintain consistency.

0 coins

Will do. Thanks everyone for the input. Going with broad general intangibles language plus separate equipment classification.

0 coins

Clay, I've handled dozens of these tech collateral classifications and here's what I've learned - the key is understanding the economic substance, not just the legal form. Your Oracle licenses are clearly general intangibles, but for the Salesforce reseller agreements, look at whether you're securing the right to use the software OR the right to receive payments from sublicensing. The former is general intangibles, the latter could be accounts receivable. For the custom CRM they license to clients, those licensing agreements generate payment streams, so they're definitely general intangibles (the right to receive those payments). I'd go with: "all general intangibles including but not limited to software licenses, licensing agreements, intellectual property rights, customer contracts, and all proceeds thereof; and all equipment including computer hardware, servers, and related tangible personal property." Keep it broad but specific enough to show you understand what you're securing. The Friday deadline is tight but doable - just don't overthink the gray areas.

0 coins

Tesla UCC filing rejected - debtor name mismatch issue

Has anyone dealt with Tesla Motors Inc vs Tesla Inc debtor name issues on UCC filings? Our bank financed a Model S delivery fleet and the UCC-1 got rejected because we used 'Tesla Motors Inc' as the debtor name but apparently their legal entity changed to just 'Tesla Inc' sometime back. The SOS portal kicked it back saying exact legal name required. Now I'm worried about the gap in perfection timing. We have a $2.8M credit facility riding on this and I need to get a clean UCC-1 on file ASAP. Anyone know the correct current legal name for Tesla for UCC purposes? Also wondering if I should file a new UCC-1 or can I do a UCC-3 amendment to fix the debtor name? Getting conflicting advice from our legal team.

Update: New UCC-1 with Tesla Inc was accepted! Thanks everyone for the quick help. The Certana tool suggestion was really helpful too - going to use that for our next batch of filings to avoid these name issues.

0 coins

Great news! Tesla Inc filings usually go through smoothly once you have the name right.

0 coins

Finally some good news on UCC filings. These name issues are such a pain.

0 coins

This is such a common issue with corporate name changes! I've been burned by this before with other entities. For future Tesla deals, I always double-check that the borrower entity matches exactly with what's on their current Delaware Secretary of State filing. Pro tip: Tesla's subsidiaries can be tricky too - make sure you're not accidentally using Tesla Energy Operations Inc or Tesla Motors Netherlands BV if you're dealing with their main US operations. The $2.8M facility size definitely justifies expedited filing fees to minimize the perfection gap. Glad you got it sorted!

0 coins

Prev1...184185186187188...685Next