Rebate in Islamic sale-based financing contracts: Bank Negara Malaysia guidelines on ibrāʾ versus conventional finance practice

PurposeThis paper aims to compare the rebate computation in Islamic sale-based financing contracts as proposed by Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) in its guidelines on ibrāʾ (rebate) – with the rebate computation in conventional finance that is applicable to conventional loans, thus examining if there is a significant difference between the two approaches.Design/methodology/approachThe paper employs the qualitative analysis method, involving review and discussion of relevant literature. Subsequently, a quantitative analysis is utilized to compare both rebate computations: the one proposed by BNM for Islamic sale-based financing contracts and the conventional finance computation that is utilized in conventional loans.FindingsBNM's rebate computation for debts resulting from sale-based financing contracts does not differ from the conventional finance rebate computation applied to conventional loans; such similarity may raise the usury concerns that the conventional finance rebate computation raises.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper focused only on the fixed profit rate rebate computation proposed by BNM guidelines.Practical implicationsThe results highlight the need for seeking another rebate computation to be applied in Islamic financial institutions in the case of mandatory bilateral rebate for sale-based financing contracts – a computation that differs from the practice utilized in conventional loans in order to avoid any usury implications associated with conventional finance computation.Originality/valueThe paper examines the rebate practice proposed by BNM for sale-based financing contracts. Forcing a predetermined rebate computation in sale-based financing contracts could be plausible as BNM requires; however, the suggested computation might be questionable because it resembles conventional finance computation.