Do we have halal finance? With Shaykh Joe Bradford

Shaykh Joe Bradford is one of the most widely followed voices on Islamic finance in the US. In May 2025 he joined Safeer Mohiuddin for a conversation in our Halal Finance Speaker Series on a blunt question: do we actually have halal finance? Here are the main points, in plain English. The full recording is above.

Islamic finance should feel like good finance

His starting point is simple: Islamic finance should feel like good finance. Both sides understand the deal, both sides benefit, and nobody ends up worse off for having entered it. That fairness has to be in the contract itself, not just in how a product is described.

Why riba does harm

Shaykh Joe frames the harm of riba as social, not just personal. Interest-based credit works well for borrowers with good credit, while people with weaker credit are turned away or pay far more, and that stress spreads through whole communities. At the scale of an economy, he describes a system where gains stay private and losses get pushed onto the public.

He also distinguishes two kinds of riba: the obvious kind, money now for more money later, and transactions that don't look like loans but work the same way economically.

What real risk-sharing looks like

In a partnership, profit and loss have to be shared. His example: two partners own a home 80/20, but one of them pays all the insurance. The split looks fair on paper, but in substance one side is protected and the other carries the risk, and that starts to look like riba.

A lender charging interest benefits without having real skin in the game. A partner does.

Substance, not form

On home financing, his point is that the label doesn't decide it, the substance does:

Cost-plus sale (murabaha): legitimate when the financier truly owns the home first and carries real risk before selling it on.
Diminishing partnership (diminishing musharakah): can be valid, but loses its substance when the buyout is forced, there was never a real intent to be partners, and pricing simply tracks interest rates. At that point, he says, it can look like a legal fiction.

In a genuine partnership, buying out your partner happens at a price agreed at the time.

Is a higher price a problem?

Not by itself. A higher cost can be a warning sign, but it doesn't make a product haram. Some contracts carry protections that cost money. What matters is how the contract works, especially when things go wrong.

The path forward

He sees real progress: new models that actually hold ownership and risk, and steady, ethical growth. His advice to buyers is to treat providers as businesses, not institutions you owe loyalty to. Ask how the product works when things go wrong, negotiate, and make them earn your money.

From the Q&A

Should you support imperfect Islamic institutions or avoid them? He calls it a false choice: they're businesses, so question them and make them earn your business.
Profit rates match interest rates, so is there any difference? Some providers simply track interest rates, but that doesn't mean the principles can't work. The hard part is doing it at scale.
Why does my contract mention "interest"? Usually it's a tax form or addendum so payments can be deducted, which is fine if it isn't part of the contract itself.
What if the buyer pays all the taxes, insurance and HOA for a fixed rent? That leaves the risk unequal, because those costs rise over time.