Medical and dental equipment finance for New Zealand practices.

It covers chairs and delivery units, imaging, sterilisation, diagnostic and surgical equipment, practice management systems and the fit-out that houses them. The facility is secured against identified equipment with a security interest registered on the Personal Property Securities Register, and installation is commonly financed alongside it.

Because almost every factor points the same way. Clinical equipment lasts fifteen years or more, it is standardised enough that the New Zealand resale market is national rather than local, practice revenue is unusually predictable, and the professions involved carry registration requirements. Lenders read all of that as lower risk and respond with longer terms and lower deposits.

A single surgery commonly runs from $120,000 to $250,000 including the chair, delivery unit, light, cabinetry and services, and a full practice fit-out with imaging runs well beyond that. The figures on this page are indicative bands rather than quotes, and a supplier quote decides an actual project.

Commonly yes, and several New Zealand banks run dedicated programmes for registered professionals covering exactly this case. A personal guarantee is standard, and the established revenue of the practice being bought into is usually what makes the application work despite the buyer having no trading history of their own.

No. Equipment is asset finance secured against identifiable goods. Goodwill has no such security and is assessed on different criteria, so a practice purchase commonly becomes two facilities rather than one. They are frequently arranged with the same lender and are still distinct products with distinct terms.

Some medical services are exempt or zero-rated for GST purposes depending on what they are and who provides them, which affects a practice’s ability to claim input tax on a purchase. That materially changes the effective cost of substantial equipment, and it is a question about the practice rather than the equipment. The accountant is the right person to settle it before signing.

Where the practice is GST registered and entitled to claim, under a hire purchase the GST on the full purchase price is generally claimable in the return covering the period the agreement begins rather than across the payments, subject to the accountant’s confirmation of the accounting basis and the practice’s GST position. Under an operating lease the GST is typically claimed on each rental as it is invoiced, again subject to the accountant’s confirmation.

They have different useful lives, which is the argument for separate terms. A chair works for fifteen to twenty years while digital imaging moves on a shorter cycle, and a facility that outlasts the imaging means paying for equipment already replaced. Splitting them costs a little more in administration and matches each term to the asset behind it.

Yes. There is a genuine refurbished market in clinical equipment, and specialist financiers write against it where banks prefer new. Terms are shorter and service history and remaining manufacturer support drive them, because both determine what the equipment is worth to the next practice.

It matters for the fit-out portion in the same way it does in hospitality. Cabinetry, plumbing, electrical and services installed into leased premises are largely unrecoverable, and a facility running past the lease leaves payments on work in a space the practice may no longer occupy. Loose equipment is far less exposed because it moves with the practice.

Radiation source licensing for imaging equipment, sterilisation validation, practitioner registration and practising certificates, and the ongoing compliance those carry. None of them are covered by a finance agreement, they have their own costs, and the licensing in particular can take longer to obtain than the equipment takes to arrive.

While volume is unproven, commonly yes. Referring costs the practice the margin on that work rather than any capital, and it carries no commitment. Once the referred volume is predictable, that same figure is what makes the equipment case, and it is a much better basis for the decision than a projection.