{"id":13088,"date":"2026-09-18T14:55:25","date_gmt":"2026-09-18T14:55:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/facesconsent.com\/blog\/?p=13088"},"modified":"2026-09-18T14:55:25","modified_gmt":"2026-09-18T14:55:25","slug":"how-2-price-your-treatments-offering-finance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/facesconsent.com\/blog\/how-2-price-your-treatments-offering-finance\/","title":{"rendered":"How to Price Your Aesthetic Treatments When Offering Finance"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

A \u00a3600 booking with \u00a3450 in fully allocated costs appears to leave \u00a3150 in operating profit before tax. A 5% merchant finance<\/mark><\/a> fee removes \u00a330, cutting that profit by 20%. The client still sees \u00a3600. The clinic<\/mark><\/a> retains less.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These figures are illustrative, not Faces fees; VAT is addressed separately below. They show why finance<\/mark><\/a> for aesthetic treatments belongs in the costing model before monthly repayments appear on a price list.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Alt<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Establish the full cost of delivering care<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Reliable treatment pricing covers the appointment journey, including consultation, clinical time, documentation, cleaning and expected reviews. It also needs to recover overheads: premises, indemnity cover, equipment depreciation, software and marketing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An illustrative \u00a3180 cost might comprise \u00a360 in materials, \u00a370 in staff time and \u00a350 in overheads and follow-up provision. Owner-practitioners should include payment for their own labour before describing the remainder as profit. Avoid double-counting: if an overhead allocation already includes staff wages, those same wages should not appear again as a separate cost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Capacity changes the calculation. Monthly overheads of \u00a33,000 spread across 100 completed appointments cost \u00a330 each. Dividing by 200 available slots instead allocates only \u00a315, leaving a shortfall when half remain empty. For appointments of different lengths, allocation by occupied clinical hour is more useful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Practitioners assessing how to price aesthetic treatments should establish this cost floor before comparing local aesthetic treatment prices. Faces\u2019 guide to structuring clinic prices<\/mark><\/a> provides a useful starting framework. A competitor\u2019s headline figure cannot reveal its staffing costs or appointment capacity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Separate merchant fees from client interest<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Effective aesthetic business pricing distinguishes the fee paid by the clinic from interest paid by the borrower. A consumer\u2019s 0% offer does not necessarily mean a cost-free service for the business. Published lender guidance on finance costs<\/mark><\/a> describes merchant charges separately from customer borrowing costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before introducing aesthetic clinic finance<\/mark><\/a>, obtain the current written fee schedule. Confirm whether the percentage applies to the whole purchase or only the financed balance, whether additional charges apply, and the VAT treatment of those charges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Comparing finance<\/mark><\/a> options for aesthetic treatments also means checking subscriptions, settlement conditions, refund fees and whether different repayment terms carry different merchant rates. The relevant figure is the clinic\u2019s actual contracted cost, not a historical percentage in a blog.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Choose the right profit calculation<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

A useful aesthetic treatment pricing model distinguishes a target profit in pounds from a target percentage margin. They produce different prices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Preserving a fixed profit<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Assume delivery costs of \u00a3180, a target operating profit of \u00a3120, and a hypothetical 5% fee on the entire selling price. For this example, there is no VAT on the sale and no additional fee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Price = (delivery cost + target profit) \u00f7 (1 \u2212 fee rate)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Price = (\u00a3180 + \u00a3120) \u00f7 0.95 = \u00a3315.79<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fee is \u00a315.79, leaving \u00a3300 before delivery costs and \u00a3120 afterwards. A fixed transaction charge belongs in the numerator: an additional \u00a32 charge would change the calculation to \u00a3302 \u00f7 0.95, producing \u00a3317.89.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Simply adding 5% to \u00a3300 produces \u00a3315. After the \u00a315.75 fee, only \u00a3299.25 remains. The shortfall arises because the lender charges its percentage on the increased price too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Preserving a percentage margin<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

For a 40% operating margin after the finance fee:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Price = delivery cost \u00f7 (1 \u2212 fee rate \u2212 target margin)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Price = \u00a3180 \u00f7 (1 \u2212 0.05 \u2212 0.40) = \u00a3327.27<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here, margin means profit divided by sales, not profit divided by costs. The 40% target is an illustration, not an industry benchmark. At the earlier \u00a3315.79 price, \u00a3120 profit represents approximately 38% of sales. Preserving the same pounds of profit therefore does not preserve the original percentage margin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Understanding how to price your treatment for finance<\/mark><\/a> therefore starts with selecting the intended return. A finance treatment pricing worksheet should state that target explicitly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Alt<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Recalculate correctly when VAT applies<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

VAT can change whether aesthetic treatment finance<\/mark><\/a> is commercially viable at an existing price.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under HMRC\u2019s guidance on cosmetic services<\/mark><\/a>, services undertaken purely for cosmetic reasons are standard-rated. Being a registered healthcare professional does not automatically make every service exempt. An accountant should establish the correct treatment of the clinic\u2019s supplies and registration obligations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For a VAT-registered clinic making a standard-rated sale, \u00a3360 includes \u00a360 VAT and therefore represents \u00a3300 revenue, following HMRC\u2019s VAT calculation method<\/mark><\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the merchant fee is 5% of that \u00a3360, the fee is \u00a318. With delivery costs of \u00a3180, measured after any recoverable VAT, operating profit is \u00a3102.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To retain \u00a3120 under those assumptions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

VAT-inclusive price = (\u00a3180 + \u00a3120) \u00f7 [(1 \u00f7 1.20) \u2212 0.05] = \u00a3382.98<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This assumes no additional fee VAT or other charges. Any irrecoverable VAT must be included in the costing model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Decide how finance fits the wider price list<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Sound aesthetic clinic<\/mark><\/a> pricing does not automatically create a higher price for financed clients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A clinic can absorb the fee where the remaining margin is acceptable, or review its standard prices across payment methods. It can also model a blended payment cost. If 30% of sales value attracts a 5% finance<\/mark><\/a> fee and 70% attracts a 1% payment fee, the weighted cost is 2.2%. That average supports planning but does not make every individual booking equally profitable. Stress-testing the same model at 60% financed sales raises the blended cost to 3.4%, showing how a change in payment mix affects returns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When pricing treatments for clients, avoid adding a finance surcharge without checking the agreement and obtaining appropriate compliance advice. The FCA\u2019s rules on interest-free claims<\/mark><\/a> require the total payable not to exceed the cash price where the offer is described as interest-free.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A cheaper non-finance price therefore needs careful consideration; relabelling the difference an \u201cadministration fee\u201d does not resolve the issue. These calculations establish the revenue needed to cover costs, not permission to charge different prices by payment method.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cost packages and cancellations before launch<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

With payment plans for aesthetic treatments, a package discount and merchant fee can reduce income together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A hypothetical \u00a3900 course discounted to \u00a3810 leaves \u00a3769.50 after a 5% fee, before delivery costs and ignoring VAT. The combined reduction against \u00a3900 is 14.5%, not merely the advertised 10% discount.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Each package needs an agreed scope, expected review time and a fair cancellation process. It should not contain unnecessary appointments simply to meet a lender\u2019s minimum borrowing amount. The GMC\u2019s cosmetic-intervention standards<\/mark><\/a> explicitly prevent commercial interests from compromising care for its registrants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before launch, confirm what triggers settlement, how partial refunds work and whether fees are returned. Delivery should never be confirmed early merely to release funds; the provider\u2019s contractual delivery conditions must genuinely be met.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Money received for future appointments still needs to fund those appointments. It should not all be treated as available profit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Explain the total price before the monthly figure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Clients<\/mark><\/a> comparing monthly payments for aesthetic treatments need the full purchase price and repayment terms, not an isolated monthly amount.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For illustration, a \u00a3600 purchase with a \u00a3120 deposit and six \u00a380 repayments totals \u00a3600 where no borrowing charges apply. With interest or fees, that division is insufficient; staff should use the lender\u2019s approved illustration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A quote explaining the cost of aesthetic treatments should specify what is included and show unavoidable charges upfront, including applicable VAT. The CMA\u2019s price-transparency guidance<\/mark><\/a> explains why mandatory charges cannot be held back until checkout.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Use approved finance<\/mark><\/a> wording, including required status disclosures. Under the FCA\u2019s advertising rules<\/mark><\/a>, interest-bearing repayment claims can trigger representative-example requirements. Promotions exclusively for 0% APR agreements have a specific exception, not an exemption from all advertising rules.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Avoid urgency that pressures a borrowing decision. ASA guidance on responsible cosmetic advertising<\/mark><\/a> highlights problems with promotions that rush consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Test the economics against completed bookings<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The commercial test for financing aesthetic treatments is retained profit, not financed sales alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Review realised fees, refunds, appointment time and profit per occupied clinical hour monthly. Compare the actual finance charge with the fee for the payment method it replaces, rather than automatically treating the whole finance<\/mark><\/a> fee as an additional cost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Separate genuinely additional bookings from clients<\/mark><\/a> who would otherwise have paid upfront. Moving an existing booking onto finance <\/mark>creates a fee without necessarily creating extra revenue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Faces supports finance<\/mark><\/a> applications through direct links and its Booking System. Its guide to setting up finance<\/mark><\/a> explains the registration process and operational considerations. Those routes can support a consistent process, but each clinic still needs its own cost model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n