How much home should I buy?

A reader who works with RE, Whittier Homes, says:

I’m in the camp that you don’t leave too much equity tied up in the walls of a house. That being said there is a risk factor or a comfort zone that every investor has to know. The bottom line is you don’t want to get over leverage and get caught on the short end of a declining market.

Home equity is simply what your home is valued at (today) less what you still owe on it (today).

This leads me to think that I’ve never said … and, nobody’s ever asked: How much equity should I have in my own home?

Well, there’s a reason:

I have NOTHING to say about how much equity – as a % of your house value – and, EVERYTHING to say about how much equity – as a % of your Net Worth – you should have tied up in your own home.

In other words, your equity is a function of:

– How much your house costs to buy

– How much it increases in value over time

– How much deposit you have available now

– How much you choose to put in / take out of the value of your house over time

I have no advice as to how much you should spend on your house in the first place, that’s your business not mine 🙂

But, I do have some guidelines that pretty much help to answer the “how much home should I buy?” question (other than for your first home), albeit obliquely:

1. The 20% Rule ensures that you are always investing at least 75% of your entire Net Worth (after allowing for another 5% to be spent on ‘stuff’),

2. The 25% Income Rule ensures that if you do decide to borrow money to buy a home, that you do not overcommit your cashflow,

3. The Cash Cascade makes sure that if you do have a mortgage, that you don’t pay it off too quickly if better investing opportunities abound.

Put these ‘rules’ into practice and you won’t go too far wrong, when it comes to your own home …

What price security?

How do you put a price on security?

Well, in this post I’m going to try and do exactly that but, first MoneyMonk asks the question that all people have at the back of their minds:

As a woman, I just want to say that “to each it’s own” Women love security.

If you are not a person that love investing, and you have the cash to pay off your mortgage (considering that you plan to live their forever)

Adrian- not everyone is business oriented. Some just don’t have the business acumen to run a business. Therefore, that group SHOULD pay off the mortgage

This is the dream of home ownership: own your home outright and you have nothing to worry about.

But, do you?

Let’s say that you own a $150,000 home today … what will it be worth in 30 year’s time?

About the same as a $150,000 home today, but in future dollars!

So, let me ask you; when your kids grow up, move out, and you retire, what are you going to move into?

Probably the same, or another $150,000 home … a smaller condo or newer townhouse that will probably not give you too much change, if any, from $150,000, a retirement home that (with fees) will cost you far more than $150,000.

Your home is not your financial security; your realizable net worth is. Put it another way: you can’t live off your home, but you can live off your cash and investments.

True security comes from knowing that you can pay your monthly bills for the rest of your life, without needing to work or get handouts from friends, relatives, or the government, through up markets and down (war, pestilence, and other Acts of God aside).

I hope that you see my point …

So, let’s look at two scenarios for a $150,000 house that you just bought and locked in a 30 year fixed rate loan at 6% (a bit higher than today’s actual rates, which are still between 5% and 5.5%):

1. You pay off your mortgage early

Note: We will assume that you are allowed to pay off as little / much as you like on your loan (not the case with some fixed rate loans in the USA, and certainly not the case with most fixed rate loans in most other countries!) because it makes the math simpler.

This is great, because you ‘earn’ 6% on your money [AJC: remember, a dollar saved – in interest – is the same as a dollar earned], better yet:

– The amount you ‘earn’ is guaranteed; every year that you are no longer paying that 6% loan, you are in effect earning 6% … simple and guaranteed!

– Unlike an investment that pays you 6%, there is no tax to be paid on the 6% mortgage that you save (although, there can be a negative benefit of losing the tax deduction on your home loan interest … but, I’m trying to keep this simple), so it’s more like earning 7.5% – 8.5% (depending on your tax rate) in any other investment.

– Let’s say that you plonk the entire $150k down in one hit, you save the entire $175k INTEREST (yes, a house that you buy for $150k in 2010 will have cost you $325k, just in principal and interest, by the time you have paid off the 30 year loan in 2040).

2. You do not pay off your mortgage early

NotePaying the loan off slower will, naturally, save you something greater than $0 and less than $175,000 … but, is too hard to calculate, here, so we will continue to use the assumption that somehow, you were able to pay that entire $150k loan off in one hit.

Well, it’s a fairly simple calculation then, isn’t it: what can you invest $150,000 in that will return more than $175,000? Let’s run some numbers and see:

Business: If Michael Masterson is right, and we gain 50% (or more) from our own business, then after 30 years you would have earned $29 Billion on your $150k ‘seed capital’.

But, MoneyMonk is right: there is extreme risk and skill involved in being successful in business … just a shame the potential reward is so low 😉

[AJC: just a tad more than the $175k interest that you would have saved if you used the money to pay off your mortgage instead of starting a business]

Real-Estate and Stocks: Again, if Michael Masterson is right, and we gain 30% by investing in a mixture of buy/hold real-estate and stocks (naturally, continually reinvesting the rents and dividends), then after 30 years you would have $392 million …

… if that sounds a lot, remember that Warren Buffett built up a $40 Billion+ fortune over 40 years at not much more than 21% compounded.

Stocks: I agree with Michael Masterson, that if you buy stock in just a few good businesses when they are are going cheap (as the market does from time to time) and wait 30 years, you should have no trouble getting a 15% compounded (pre-tax) return so, after 30 years you would have nearly 10 million.

But, all of this has some risk / skill associated with it … so, maybe paying off the mortgage and snaffling that $175k is still the way to go for all of those risk averse people [AJC: Like me. True!] out there?

But, wait, what if we just do the ‘no brainer’ thing and plonk that entire $150k in a set-and-forget-low-cost-Index-Fund?

Here’s the good news: paying off your mortgage is a 30 year investment (you have forgone 30 years of being locked in to a loan and paying 6% interest year in, year out), so it’s only fair that we buy $150k of Index Fund units and don’t even look at our portfolio for 30 years, right?

Well, that’s an ideal strategy – THE ideal strategy – for Boglehead set-and-forget investors! So …

Index Funds: Over 30 years, the markets (hence the lowest cost Index Funds) have averaged something more than 12% – set and forget (!) – so, after 30 years you would still gain close to $3.5 million!

But, wait … we’re all about security here: you can’t live off averages, right? What happens if there’s another crash like 1929 and 2008 the day after I plonk my entire $150k into an Index Fund?

Well, you lose half your money immediately 🙁

But, we don’t care what happens immediately, this is a 30 year set-and-forget plan … and, there has been NO 30 year period where the stock market hasn’t returned AT LEAST 8%.

Now, isn’t 8% (since we have to pay tax on it) exactly the same as the equivalent after-tax 6% mortgage (give or take 0.5%)?

Yes!

The lowest possible return that we can get with any reasonable investment strategy that we can come up with is exactly the same as the best possible return that we can get by paying off our mortgage early.

Now, isn’t that interesting?

Is your home an asset?

I spend a LOT of time on this blog talking about your home, and rightly so; your home is often regarded as your single largest asset.

Or, is it?

TraineeInvestor reopens the debate with what I think is a really interesting – seemingly ‘throwaway’ – line in his comment to this post:

The overwhelming consensus of opinion on internet forums and blogs is that your home is not an investment. (There are even people who think it is a liability rather than an asset!!!).

The “overwhelming consesus” hasn’t made $7 million in 7 years, and probably never will 😛

But there is grounding to the home-not-an-asset way of thinking; for example, in this post I quoted Robert Kiyosaki who first told me that a home is NOT an asset [AJC: Unlike many others, I am not a Robert Kiyosaki detractor … Rich Dad Poor Dad was the first book that I ever read on personal finance and, at the time, it really opened my eyes to the value of financial education].

Here’s what RK said: 

  My Poor Dad Says   My Rich Dad Says
       
  “My house is an asset.”   “My house is a liability.”
       
  Rich dad says, “If you stop working today, an asset puts money in your pocket and a liability takes money from your pocket. Too often people call liabilities assets. It’s important to know the difference between the two.

Yet, paradoxically, TraineeInvestor also pointed to the exact opposite: study after study has shown that the wealthy own their own homes and the ‘poor’ do not!

So, what do I think?

Well – and, this may also SEEM paradoxical – I actually agree that a home is not  an asset in the sense that it doesn’t earn an income.

Of course, you could rent to yourself.

Tell me then, though, when do you – could you – ever realize the value in that ‘asset’?

Only if you sell (you never will); or, pass it on (it’s not an asset for YOU).

Yet, there is one way to realize at least part of the value of your asset (while you still need a place to live), and that is to release some equity by refinancing.

So, technically, I agree with the ‘non-asset’ thinking, which is why I ask you to at least minimize the equity in your own home to a mere (by Dave Ramsey standards) 20% or less of your current Net Worth (and, review annually).

I also advocate buying your first home – more for some ‘human nature’ reasons rather than strict financial reasons – but, nowhere in this blog have I ever said: “… then, upgrade it”! 😉

Why bother keeping up an esoteric “is your home an asset or a liability?” debate at all, when the only real question that you need ask yourself is:

Can I reach my Number if I buy my own home, then keep [insert ‘% of current home value’ of choice: 0%; 10%; 20%; 50%; 100%; other] tied up as home equity?

My standard advice is, YES … if:

a) I buy my first home (with whatever starting equity that my bank and I can agree on), then

b) [as soon as reasonably possible, start to] maintain no more than 20% of my net worth in that – or, any future – home as equity

c) and, reassess b) annually (against both my home’s and my own net worth’s current value)

Ultimately, the equity that you choose to keep in your home either helps you to reach your Number, or it doesn’t.

For most people, “reaching their Number” means amasssing ‘real’ assets in the range of millions of dollars. Logically, tying up valuable equity in something that can’t possible reach ‘millions of dollars’ in value is wrong, so why do it?

What does this all mean for you?

My ‘rules’ of home ownership are designed to give you the best chance to reach your Number by your Date.

Depending on how YOU choose to look at it, your home is either your single largest asset or single largest liability …

… the real point of this blog is to make sure that it doesn’t stay that way 🙂

Is your first home a good investment?

This is a loaded question, obviously, because I just revisited the subject of buying your first home (of which I am now an avid fan) a week or so ago; Rick suggested:

Since equities also have a good long term investment record, why not scale back on the primary residence somewhat and invest in both real estate and equities?

At the time, I responded by saying: “The effect of the 20% Equity Rule and 25% Income Rule is to ensure that you are always investing AT LEAST 75% of your networth elsewhere (could be business, RE, equities, etc., etc.).”

Of course, that doesn’t address the question, as I have also said that these rules are up for grabs – meaning, you can just ignore them – when considering buying your first home.

Now, I am clearly a fan of buying your first home – you just need to go back to one of my very first posts to see that – but, it wasn’t always that way …

… I started by believing that there were other investments out there that performed better than your first home.

And, that still holds true; after all, as my Grandfather once told my Grannie when they had the same decision to make soon after immigrating to Australia:

You can’t always buy a business from your home … but, you can always buy a home from [the profits produced by] your business.

This still holds true … as does the 20% Equity Rule. In other words, if you are absolutely committed to using the funds to start a business, or are ABSOLUTELY committed to ALWAYS investing at least 75% of your Net Worth, then by all means keep renting.

It’s just that 99% of people will – sooner or later – fall off the investing wagon. It’s human nature.

Then they’ll end up with no investments, little net worth, and no home. Buying your first home, and using that as a springboard into other investments, is a great way to go; just remember what I said, way back in the beginning of 2008:

 If you are ready, willing and able to buy your first house, or you are thinking of trading up (or, down) …. here’s my advice:

Put aside the emotional decisions and just consider the financial impact, and that is: your house is the ONLY way that most people will ever get off the launching pad to financial success …

Why? Because, you are building up equity over time (even a flat or falling real estate market eventually climbs back up again) …

… but – and here is the key – ONLY if you are prepared to put the equity in your house to work for you … that means, borrowing against the equity in your house to INVEST.

What should you invest in first?

My wife just got back (well, just before our Noosa trip) from a trip overseas to attend her nephew’s wedding; and, the young happily married couple decided to spend part of their honeymoon in Australia … so, they are staying with us right now!

This was an opportunity for me to interfere in their financial lives … naturally, I couldn’t resist 😉

It’s also an opportunity for me to share my financial plan for our younger readers, whether single or married.

The plan is simple:

Step 1: Start working!

Step 2: Use your pre-work spending and living standards as a guide to ensure that you save at least 10% of your gross salary; preferably more.

Step 3: No matter what your Step 2 Income and Expenditure, save at least 50% of any future salary increase

Step 4: That includes any ‘found money’ such as: change found on the street; tax refund checks; small handouts/inheritences from friends/family (naturally, you will ‘up this’ to saving 95% of any LARGE handout/inheritence); etc.

It won’t take too long to actually have some money (perhaps for the first time in your life) to think about actually INVESTING.

So, what to invest in? Stocks; car parks; italian art; … ?

It’s simple: your own home!

It will probably be a small house or condo to start with … possibly with some ‘fixer upper’ potential …

But, what about the 20% Equity Rule and the 25% Income Rule, which will ensure that you can only afford to buy a shoe-box (literally) at this early stage of your financial life?

You forget them for your first home …

… and, replace them with these guidelines:

– Put as much equity into your house (by way of making a deposit) as you have savings (you’ll want to keep a little buffer against immediate expenses)

– Borrow as much as the mortgage payment that you can afford, which will be the amount per month that you are currently saving (of course, you’ll want to keep a little buffer against extra expenses).

When you (eventually) get tempted to ‘trade up’ to a bigger house, that’s when you apply the 20% Rule and the 25% Income Rule!

But, shouldn’t you invest in something else first? Perhaps you’re not even married yet and can happily rent for a while?

This is true: but, buy the condo anyway … then you can evaluate if your rent is so cheap that you should rent out the condo for a while before moving into it. Same applies if you move to another location: rent out the house/condo and rent for yourself elsewhere until you are ready to trade up (or across).

Why?

Let’s decide whether, over the course of your life, real-estate will go up in price or down in price? The answer for all of history has been UP (over a sufficiently long period).

Decide whether you will ever want to own your own residence? Again, the answer is YES for the overwhelming portion of humanity (and, even if you think not, I guarantee that your eventual spouse will have a very hard go at convincing you otherwise).

So, unless you have an overwhelming reason to believe that RE won’t go up in price for the next X month/years, then you are compounding your money at RE’s typical growth rate (6% … depending upon who you believe and where you live) TIMES the leverage that the bank is giving you LESS (your mortgage payment/costs – rent you would have otherwise paid).

Run the numbers; it’s a VERY good/safe rate of return 🙂

Be the bank!

My son asked why I don’t just plonk by money into a safety deposit box to tap into those wonderful gross margins that banks earn buy ‘buying’ your money at 3% and ‘selling’ it back to you (or to other people/businesses) at 7%.

That lead to a great discussion on P2P lending, which partially addressed the problem of risk for me: P2P offers filters to allow you to sort loans; ratings to allow you to evaluate loans; and FICO-based ‘risk rated’ interest rates (circa 10%) to go along with all of this.

But, that doesn’t satisfy me …

And, it’s not because the banks have MUCH better systems to evaluate and manage loans and it’s their core business, it’s because I can do much better with my limited capital than P2P levels of interest.

Here’s two things to think about:

– Does P2P provide the annual compound growth rate that YOU need to reach your Number?

– Do you have the bank’s virtually UNLIMITED access to capital or is the amount that you can apply to P2P as a % of your Net Worth limited?

These points are critical: you have a limited amount of investment resource available to you and (probably!) a very large Number / soon Date to achieve using what you currently have as a springboard.

Now, let’s flip to the other side:

Banks dig into their ability to borrow (which IS the basis for their entire business, investment banking / asset management services aside) and lend to us for what?

Either to SPEND (on consumer items, if we are dumb) or to INVEST (in our homes, businesses, etc.) if we are smart.

So, let’s put those things together to create our own ‘bank’:

1. We have limited cash to ‘lend’ at our disposal, so we need to find a way to tap into vast amounts of borrowing power just like the banks.

2. Well, we don’t have the Regulations, Reputations, and Resources (e.g. access to the capital markets) that allow the banks to borrow (then lend) so much, but we do have something that allows us to achieve effectively the same huge jump in personal borrowing capacity: the spare equity in our houses.

[AJC: You knew there was a catch! If you don’t have a house, have GFC’ed your equity out the window, or otherwise don’t have enough equity built up yet, bookmark this post and take the rest of the day off …]

3. If you DO have spare equity in your house, and can refi. to a fixed rate loan that locks in your borrowings circa 4% or so then you are probably now sitting on a relatively large sum of cash to lend, just like a bank (relatively speaking!).

4. So, you can either:

– Do, what the banks do and lend to somebody who needs the cash at a higher rate; e.g. P2P where you may get 10% for each 4% ‘unit’ that you supply … a VERY healthy 150% gross margin (plus, you have NO staff or overheads), OR

– Do, what I would recommend: cut out the middle-man and lend the money to yourself!

What would you do with that money that you have borrowed?

What any sensible investor would do with money that they borrow from the bank – depending upon their Number and their appetite for risk:

– Buy some investment real-estate,

– Buy stock [AJC: a friendly ‘bank manager’, no margin calls …. sweet],

– Start a business … it could even be a P2P lending business 😉

That last one isn’t such a joke; I would be more tempted to invest IN a P2P business than I would be to lend VIA a P2P. Why?

It’s simple … the former gives me ho hum 10% returns (with some credit risk attached), whilst the latter gives me access to potentially, unlimited returns!

Are you worried about the risk of business failure?

Well, if the P2P site goes under, isn’t my risk of capital loss the same as if my cash was sitting in their investment accounts [AJC: which is one of the reasons why the SEC is VERY interested in regulating P2P, all of a sudden … but, until they do … 😉 ]?

Safe as houses?

Picture 2Well, I did ask for it, and the first cab off the rank for the ‘diss Adrian party’ is Dan who thinks that one of my favorite posts – Contrary to Popular Opinion, Paying Off Your Mortgage Is The Dumbest Move You Can Make – is ‘ridiculous’. Seriously, thanks for opening up an important new discussion with this comment, Dan:

This is ridiculous. The author apparently believes he is untouchable and will never lose his job, get sick, or die.

You can do all the complex math you want, but the simple fact of the matter is that Risk is the biggest variable, and I don’t see it show up in your equation once.

Don’t be stupid America, and dont prescribe to a system that encourages you to continue owing people money long after you need to.

Pay off your house, free up some income, then pay off your credit cards, pay off your car, and be a happier, less stressed individual.

Hmmm …. paying off your mortgage as a ‘risk management tool’?

Before we even consider why anybody in their right mind would pay off a (say) 8% mortgage before paying off a (say) 19% credit card or car loan, let’s review the substance of my “don’t pay down your mortgage early” argument:

Look at everything that you own as a business: if it’s your own home, separate the ownership of the property in your mind from it’s use …

… for example, even if it’s your own home, treat yourself as your own tenant and figure the rent that you would otherwise had to pay when doing the sums.

Then evaluate the investment against any other investment or ‘business’ …

… but, if you’re still trying to get rich(er) quick(er)?

If you own a home, don’t pay it off … use the upside to help you buy more and more of these wonderful, one-of-a-kind, almost-too-good-to-be-true ’businesses’ …

If you have other sources of income (businesses, investments) don’t spend it or reinvest all of it … use some of the spare cash to help you buy more and more of these wonderful, one-of-a-kind, almost-too-good-to-be-true ’businesses’ …

That’s my advice to you, but only take it if you want to be rich!

But, Dan says that the ‘math’ matters not, you should consider what happens if you “lose [your] job, get sick, or die”. Well, what happens?

If you have paid out your mortgage, your money is locked in the safest bank vault imaginable … all you have to do it sell the home to access the cash. Just pray that the market is an up market and not a down market, when these events outside of your control force you to sell. Or, would YOU prefer to choose the timing? Hmmm …

Of course, you could just borrow some money against the house; but then, aren’t you now putting yourself in EXACTLY the financial situation that Dan wants you to avoid: i.e. “owing people money long after you need to”?

And, even if you still do want to use your Zero Mortgage Bank, what are the chances of the bank actually lending you (or your survivors) any money when you are jobless, sick, or dead?

Oh, and let’s say that you do happen to be unfortunate enough to “lose [your] job, get sick, or die” while you are still in the 10-15 year period when you are well ahead of the 30-year payment curve, but haven’t paid off the mortgage in full, yet? How easy will it be to refinance, or even convince your bank to hold payments for you? Even if you THINK they will, you had better be certain 😉

What do you reckon? Dan’s on the right track? C’mon, be honest … would you feel safer paying off your mortgage early, or letting it ride?

I think we’re screwed …

housing_crashIf you needed any evidence that the ‘global financial crisis’ – on a global macro level – and problems with the US real-estate market – on a global micro level – are still affecting people in the their day to day lives, you need read no further than Rischa in Seattle’s comment [AJC: I’ve added punctuation for your reading pleasure]:

From what I’ve read I think we’re screwed, but I’m not even sure what we can do. Here is the scenario: my husband and I bought this house about 10 years ago in the boom here; with both of us working we could afford the mortgage and our lifestyle easily. I’ve [since] been laid off and we’ve been living on my savings, which is now gone and I’m on unemployment, which is fast running out.

We’re about $100K upside down, we got a trad. loan 30 yr fixed, but without 2 incomes we’re sinking fast. We don’t necessarily want to stay in this house, in fact we want to move to a part of the country where the cost of living is less.

Any clues? What should we do? How do we get out of this when getting out would cost more than we have, even if we spent our retirement to get out? We would have less than nothing left!

Of course, it’s difficult to give Rischa personal advice – and, I wouldn’t do it – but, I could suggest that she go back to that post and reread the bit where I said:

Ask yourself the following TWO questions:

i) Can I afford the payments? If so,

ii) If I were to invest in a house right now, given my current net worth, is this the house that I would invest in ?

If the answer to both questions is YES, then stay. If the answer to either question is NO, then sell/move … be it into a rental or to purchase another (provided that the changeover costs/hassles are worth it).

In Rischa’s case, the answer to the first question appears to be NO … and, she would prefer to be moving to a cheaper part of the country (and, cheaper house?), anyway …

So, it’s obvious that she can’t afford her existing house, but what would you do? Hang on to a losing proposition? Or, cut your losses?

Ooops! She broke the 25% Rule ….

keeping up with the jonesI wrote a post some time ago about how I broke (nay, smashed!) the 20% Rule (you know, the one that tells you what % of your net worth you should have ‘invested’ – read: tied up – in your own home) when I bought my latest house – considering that we paid $4 mill., are about to renovate for at least $1 mill., and still own another $2 mill. house that we haven’t been able to sell due to the crash, I’d say that we need some major corrective action … which, I outlined in this post.

The next housing problem that I wrote about, doesn’t affect me (as we paid cash for our houses) but, was how to deal with the now-all-too-common situation where you are ‘upside down’ on your mortgage.

Now, thanks to Alexandria who commented on that post with a question, we can now assess the third major housing-related financial problem: what to do when you break the 25% Rule (the one that lets you know how much of your income to spend on rent/mortgage payments)?

Panic is always a good first option …

… before we do that, let’s hear Alexandria’s ‘problem’:

Ok… after reading the above I want some options on my situation. Married, three school aged kids. Currently own a home with a high mortgage that is worth just about $50K more then we owe. Not the home of our dreams. We are not in foreclosure. I am self emplyed and my husband is a Police Officer. We can make our monthly mortgage but it eats up about 60% of our monthly income. We have no savings, a mininal 401 plan, no large other debt. We are both in our mid thrities. We can rent a much nicer home in our area for about $1k less then our mortgage a month. If you were us, would you sell and rent or keep the house?

OK indeed!

My first piece of financial advice would be to dump the copper and marry some rich bloke (I’ve seen your photo) who looks like me … but, marriage proposals aside, I can’t offer you any better advice than that, because I am NOT you …

… that’s why I struggle to answer specific “what would you do if …” questions on this blog, because I rarely have enough information to know how to deal with YOUR Life’s most difficult financial decisions.

BUT, it’s not all doom-and-gloom, because I can use wonderful readers’ questions, such as this one, to inspire some general points: just don’t construe it as direct personal advice, even though I may liberally intersperse “you” and “should” in my posts to make them more readable.

Disclaimer out of the way 🙂

Even though I can’t really give you the answer that you can ‘take to the bank’, I can ask why you would consider keeping a home that you don’t like, when you can sell it and rent a nicer one and save/invest an extra $12k a year?

Better yet, what would it do for you financially (balanced against family ‘needs’ … not keeping up with the Jones’ … hence, the image at the top of this post) if you sold this place and used the freed up equity as a deposit against a smaller/cheaper place that fits closer to the 25% income Rule, and then used the money saved on mortgage payments (100% of it!) to finally start to build your financial future?

Remember, given that this is effectively your first home (i.e. you have not built up any housing equity yet) the answer – for you – maybe somewhere between the two …

Nice house v fewer financial headaches … what a trade-off to have to make 🙂

What to do when you are upside-down on your mortgage …

upside-down-houseRyan – one of our Millionaires … In Training! – is upside down on his mortgage; if you can’t afford the payments (and, I have some guidelines to help you decide when that point has been reached), then I would generally suggest that no matter whether you are right-side up, upside down, or sideways, that you should get out!

But, Ryan is a high-income earner and high-saver already so he has decided to … well … I’ll let him tell you:

If I could wave a magic wand, I would not be upside-down on my mortgage, but that will correct itself over time as we are not planning on moving soon. While we could short sell the house and rent, we will not likely do that. We are emotionally tied to the house and would not, in my opinion have much upside with a rental because we would have to either float the note on our mortgage or pay the taxes on the difference on a short sale, all to pay MAYBE $1000/month less and not have the mortgage interest to write off come april 15th. An appreciation of our home of around 5%/year, starting in 2010, [should help by] bringing us back to an equity position around 2012.

A home performs two functions: housing and investment.

Like most dual-purpose things, owning your own home is probably a poor compromise on both …

… in my experience, you can usually rent a better house than you can afford to buy AND can usually find much better returning investments.

Yet, I recommend that one does own their own home, for a number of reasons:

1. Often it can turn out to be a person’s only investment,

2. It is a ’safety net’ in case all else goes wrong,

3. You have continuity of tenure (the ‘landlord’ won’t kick you out, as long as you keep up with the payments)

4. Over time, you may build up equity that you can ‘release’ to kick-start other investing activities.

For me, it was always 3. (and, the associated ‘emotional attachment’ that comes with calling your house your ‘home’) that held the most sway as I always expected to make my ‘fortune’ elsewhere. And, I have never actually used the equity for investing (except for my brief HELOC-fueled stock speculation experiment of 2007/2008).

So, I would suggest that you ask yourself the following TWO questions:

i) Can afford the payments? If so,

ii) If I were to invest in a house right now, given my current net worth, is this the house that I would invest in ?

If the answer to both questions is YES, then stay. If the answer is NO, then sell/move … be it into a rental or to purchase another (provided that the changeover costs/hassles are worth it).

This is a question that we all need to ask ourselves at least once per year (or, whenever the market and/or our financial position changes), as – in effect – we are ‘buying’ our house every year (by missing the opportunity of selling and putting the money to work elsewhere).

Given the size of our ‘investment’, we should never take the rent/own – buy/sell decision for granted 🙂