There are a few very obvious differences between these two capital supply avenues, however both are equally useful when it comes to seeing a business entity materialize successfully.
In the scenario where the capital investment is provided for by the business owner itself means there is a lot less paper work involved when comparisons are made to the borrowed capital source.
The borrowed capital would require the justification exercise and all it entails in order to actually receive some if not all of the initial amounts requested.
There would also, in most cases, be the need to provide some sort of collateral toward the borrowed capital requested. Other features such as legal implications and documentation would have to be filed before the business can be checked for its suitability and estimated success rates.
In terms of taxes, there is also a lot of relief that can be enjoyed from both types of capital providing styles; however the percentages of taxes calculated would depend largely on the style chosen to set up the business.
Time frames affecting the eventual debut of the business entity also dictate the type of capital available. If the capital is provided for by the owner, then the time frame is easier and quicker to establish.
However if the capital is derived from a borrowed source, then delays maybe something to expect, which could have poor effects on the business, especially if the launching time frame has a level of significance tied to it.
The interest rates that the borrowed capital would incur could also be a negative element that might need to be avoided if the said capital will put the business in debt. Although it is natural to pay such interest on the borrowed amount, the said interest would eat into the profits that are made from the business.