The short answer is: sometimes — but only if your arrangement meets every part of a specific exemption, and only if you are the lender rather than introducing customers to one. Charging 0% interest is one condition among several, not a free pass on its own.

The interest-free exemption, in full

There is a genuine exemption for certain instalment credit, but the FCA sets the bar precisely. Your arrangement is likely exempt from authorisation only if all of the following are true at once:

The credit is genuinely interest-free; it carries no other charges of any kind — no administration fees, no arrangement fees, no default or late-payment charges; it is repaid within a maximum of 12 months; and it is repaid in no more than 12 instalments. Miss any one of these and the exemption falls away. A “0% finance” deal that adds a £25 admin fee, or spreads payment over 18 months, is not exempt — even though it charges no interest.

This is where most businesses trip up. They focus on the headline — “interest-free” — and overlook that a single fee, or a payment term beyond a year, takes them straight back inside the regulated perimeter.

Lending versus introducing: the part everyone misses

The exemption above applies to the credit agreement itself. But many businesses don't lend at all — they introduce the customer to a third-party lender or finance provider. That activity is credit broking, and it is regulated in its own right, regardless of whether the finance the customer ends up taking is interest-free.

So the question splits in two. If you provide the 0% credit yourself and it meets the exemption, you may not need authorisation as a lender. But if you introduce customers to a lender — the typical retail “spread the cost” arrangement — you are almost certainly broking, and broking generally needs FCA permission even when the underlying finance is free to the customer.

The FCA's own guidance is blunt on this: a retailer selling goods or services who arranges finance with a third-party lender is likely to be carrying on credit broking. The interest rate on that finance doesn't change the answer.

What changes on 15 July 2026

From 15 July 2026, the rules on interest-free “buy now, pay later” style credit — which the FCA calls Deferred Payment Credit (DPC) — change. Interest-free credit repayable in 12 or fewer instalments within 12 months, used to finance goods or services from a third party, becomes a regulated agreement. The lender providing that credit will need authorisation (or to use the Temporary Permissions Regime).

Importantly for most shops and showrooms: merchants who introduce customers to a DPC product remain exempt from needing a credit broking licence for that specific activity — this includes domestic-premises suppliers. But if your finance offering goes beyond that narrow DPC definition — longer terms, interest, or other charges — the ordinary broking rules apply and authorisation is likely needed. Our guide to the July 2026 BNPL changes covers this in detail.

The practical test for your business

Ask yourself three questions. First: do you lend the money yourself, or introduce the customer to someone who does? If you introduce, you're likely broking. Second: if you lend, is the credit completely free of interest and every other charge, repaid within 12 months across no more than 12 payments? If not, the exemption doesn't apply. Third: do you do this by way of business, as part of selling your goods or services? If yes, and you're broking or lending outside the exemption, you need authorisation.

For the great majority of businesses offering customer finance — car dealers, retailers, clinics, home-improvement firms — the answer is that they are broking, and they need limited permission credit broking authorisation. The 0% nature of the finance is reassuring to customers, but it does not remove the requirement.

Why getting this wrong matters

Carrying on a regulated activity without authorisation is a criminal offence, and agreements made in the course of it can be unenforceable. If a customer disputes their finance, or a lender reviews its introducer arrangements, “we assumed 0% meant we were exempt” is not a position any business wants to be defending. The cost and time of getting authorised properly are modest next to that risk — see what's actually at stake when you offer finance without authorisation.