Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (2026)
Purchase-money security interest; application of payments; burden of establishing
✓ current as of July 2026 Cite as: Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
409.103(1)(a)(a) “Purchase-money collateral” means goods or software that secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to that collateral.
409.103(1)(b)(b) “Purchase-money obligation” means an obligation of an obligor incurred as all or part of the price of the collateral or for value given to enable the debtor to acquire rights in or the use of the collateral if the value is in fact so used.
409.103(2)(2) Purchase-money security interest in goods. A security interest in goods is a purchase-money security interest:
409.103(2)(a)(a) To the extent that the goods are purchase-money collateral with respect to that security interest;
409.103(2)(b)(b) If the security interest is in inventory that is or was purchase-money collateral, also to the extent that the security interest secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to other inventory in which the secured party holds or held a purchase-money security interest; and
409.103(2)(c)(c) Also to the extent that the security interest secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to software in which the secured party holds or held a purchase-money security interest.
409.103(3)(3) Purchase-money security interest in software. A security interest in software is a purchase-money security interest to the extent that the security interest also secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to goods in which the secured party holds or held a purchase-money security interest if:
409.103(3)(a)(a) The debtor acquired its interest in the software in an integrated transaction in which it acquired an interest in the goods; and
409.103(3)(b)(b) The debtor acquired its interest in the software for the principal purpose of using the software in the goods.
409.103(4)(4) Consignor’s inventory purchase-money security interest. The security interest of a consignor in goods that are the subject of a consignment is a purchase-money security interest in inventory.
409.103(5)(5) Application of payment in nonconsumer-goods transaction. In a transaction other than a consumer-goods transaction, if the extent to which a security interest is a purchase-money security interest depends on the application of a payment to a particular obligation, the payment must be applied:
409.103(5)(a)(a) In accordance with any reasonable method of application to which the parties agree;
409.103(5)(b)(b) In the absence of the parties’ agreement to a reasonable method, in accordance with any intention of the obligor manifested at or before the time of payment; or
409.103(5)(c)(c) In the absence of an agreement to a reasonable method and a timely manifestation of the obligor’s intention, in the following order:
409.103(5)(c)2.2. If more than one obligation is secured, to obligations secured by purchase-money security interests in the order in which those obligations were incurred.
409.103(6)(6) No loss of status of purchase-money security interest in nonconsumer-goods transaction. In a transaction other than a consumer-goods transaction, a purchase-money security interest does not lose its status as such, even if:
409.103(6)(a)(a) The purchase-money collateral also secures an obligation that is not a purchase-money obligation;
409.103(6)(b)(b) Collateral that is not purchase-money collateral also secures the purchase-money obligation; or
409.103(6)(c)(c) The purchase-money obligation has been renewed, refinanced, consolidated, or restructured.
409.103(7)(7) Burden of proof in nonconsumer-goods transaction. In a transaction other than a consumer-goods transaction, a secured party claiming a purchase-money security interest has the burden of establishing the extent to which the security interest is a purchase-money security interest.
409.103(8)(8) Nonconsumer-goods transactions; no inference. The limitation of the rules in subs. (5) to (7) to transactions other than consumer-goods transactions is intended to leave to the court the determination of the proper rules in consumer-goods transactions. The court may not infer from that limitation the nature of the proper rule in consumer-goods transactions and may continue to apply established approaches.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases, 1986–2017 · leading case: In Re Dunlap
In Re Dunlap (2008)
“However, Wisconsin has enacted Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (UCC-Secured Transactions) 4 which provides some guidance to the court.”
Ford Motor Co. v. Lyons (1987)
“401 to 409 specifies the applicable law, that provision governs and a contrary agreement is effective only to the extent permitted by the law (including the conflict of laws rules) so specified: *455 (e) Section 409.103 on the perfection provisions of ch.”
Dubis v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. (2000)
“1429 (1979), which addresses Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (2)(b). ¶ 11. GMAC, on the other hand, looks at registration from a commercial law perspective, noting that Wis.”
In re Saxe (2013)
“” The 2004 Note is a purchase-money obligation within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (l)(b) because the loan included the entire price of the skids-teer and loan funds were used “to enable the debtor to acquire rights in” the skids-teer.”
North Shore Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Jones (In Re Jones) (1988)
“) According to Florida law, which is similar to Wis.Stat. § 409.103(3)(e), plaintiffs perfected security interest was lost four months after the move because plaintiff did not perfect again in Florida.”
Liebzeit v. FVTS Acquisition Co. (In Re Wolverine Fire Apparatus Co.) (2012)
“See Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (4). Thus, the priority of the consignor’s interest as against the rights of lien creditors of the consignee, competing secured parties, and purchasers of the goods from the consignee can be determined by reference to the priority rules generally…”
In re Manor (2017)
“incurred as all or part of the price of the collateral or for value given to enable the debtor to acquire rights in or the use of the collateral if the value is in fact so used.”
Gp Credit Co., LLC v. Orlando Residence, Ltd. (2003)
“§ 47-9-103, Official Comments on the UCC, § 5(a) (2000); Wis. Stat. § 409.103 , Official Comments on the UCC, § 5(a) (2000).”
Arthur Glick Truck Sales, Inc. v. Stuphen East Corp. (2012)
“Law § 9-103 (b)(2); Wis. Stat. Ann. § 409.103 (2)(b). 8 A perfected purchase-money security interest generally has priority over other security interests.”
In Re Crawford (2008)
“Article 9 of the UCC deals with security interests, and § 9-103 of Revised Article 9, enacted in Wisconsin as Wis. Stat. § 409.103 , specifically governs purchase money security interests.”
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Van Kylen (In Re Van Kylen) (1989)
“§ 409.103 (1987-88); Broadnax v. Prudential-Bache Securities (In re Zimmerman), 69 B.”
Matter of Kids Stop of America, Inc. (1986)
“9103(1)(d)), and Wisconsin (Wis.Stat. § 409.103(1)(d)), which provides that when goods subject to a perfected security interest in one jurisdiction are brought into the state, the security interest remains perfected if within four months after the collateral is brought into the…”
— Wis. Stat. § 409.103(1)(d) — 1 case
Matter of Kids Stop of America, Inc. (1986)
“9103(1)(d)), and Wisconsin (Wis.Stat. § 409.103(1)(d)), which provides that when goods subject to a perfected security interest in one jurisdiction are brought into the state, the security interest remains perfected if within four months after the collateral is brought into the…”
— Wis. Stat. § 409.103(2) — 1 case
Dubis v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. (2000)
“1429 (1979), which addresses Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (2)(b). ¶ 11. GMAC, on the other hand, looks at registration from a commercial law perspective, noting that Wis.”
— Wis. Stat. § 409.103(2)(b) — 1 case
Dubis v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. (2000)
“1429 (1979), which addresses Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (2)(b). ¶ 11. GMAC, on the other hand, looks at registration from a commercial law perspective, noting that Wis.”
— Wis. Stat. § 409.103(3)(e) — 1 case
North Shore Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Jones (In Re Jones) (1988)
“) According to Florida law, which is similar to Wis.Stat. § 409.103(3)(e), plaintiffs perfected security interest was lost four months after the move because plaintiff did not perfect again in Florida.”
— Wis. Stat. § 409.103(5)(a) — 1 case
In re Saxe (2013)
“” The 2004 Note is a purchase-money obligation within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (l)(b) because the loan included the entire price of the skids-teer and loan funds were used “to enable the debtor to acquire rights in” the skids-teer.”
— Wis. Stat. § 409.103(5)(b) — 1 case
In re Saxe (2013)
“” The 2004 Note is a purchase-money obligation within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (l)(b) because the loan included the entire price of the skids-teer and loan funds were used “to enable the debtor to acquire rights in” the skids-teer.”
— Wis. Stat. § 409.103(5)(c)(2) — 1 case
In re Saxe (2013)
“” The 2004 Note is a purchase-money obligation within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (l)(b) because the loan included the entire price of the skids-teer and loan funds were used “to enable the debtor to acquire rights in” the skids-teer.”
— Wis. Stat. § 409.103(5)(e) — 1 case
In re Saxe (2013)
“” The 2004 Note is a purchase-money obligation within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 409.103 (l)(b) because the loan included the entire price of the skids-teer and loan funds were used “to enable the debtor to acquire rights in” the skids-teer.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.