My Personal Finance Journey

Personal finance observation, musing and decisions in a journey toward financial independence by 2020 with at least $3 million.


By Topics

Overall:
0. About (10)
1. My Progress (139)
2. Car & Home (107)
3. Credit (138)
4. Banking (33)
5. Saving (49)
6. Investing (308)
7. Taxes (89)
8. Spending (74)
9. Misc (97)
A. Archive (49)



MONTHLY ARCHIVE

Feb 2014 (3)
Jan 2014 (6)
Jan 2012 (1)
Apr 2011 (1)
Mar 2011 (1)
Feb 2011 (1)
Jan 2011 (1)
Dec 2010 (1)
Oct 2010 (1)
Sep 2010 (1)
Aug 2010 (1)
Jul 2010 (1)
Jun 2010 (1)
May 2010 (1)
Apr 2010 (1)
Mar 2010 (6)
Feb 2010 (2)
Jan 2010 (7)
Dec 2009 (3)
Feb 2009 (4)
Jan 2009 (8)
Dec 2008 (1)
Jun 2008 (2)
May 2008 (2)
Apr 2008 (5)
Feb 2008 (3)
Jan 2008 (15)
Dec 2007 (32)
Nov 2007 (6)
Oct 2007 (8)
Sep 2007 (9)
Aug 2007 (24)
Jul 2007 (2)
Jun 2007 (1)
May 2007 (3)
Apr 2007 (4)
Mar 2007 (4)
Feb 2007 (13)
Jan 2007 (6)
Dec 2006 (3)
Nov 2006 (7)
Oct 2006 (7)
Sep 2006 (6)
Aug 2006 (4)
Jul 2006 (10)
Jun 2006 (1)
May 2006 (3)
Apr 2006 (2)
Mar 2006 (6)
Feb 2006 (6)
Jan 2006 (3)
Dec 2005 (1)
Nov 2005 (9)
Oct 2005 (8)
Sep 2005 (13)
Aug 2005 (25)
Jul 2005 (16)
Jun 2005 (17)
May 2005 (19)
Apr 2005 (20)
Mar 2005 (24)
Feb 2005 (23)
Jan 2005 (36)
Dec 2004 (40)
Nov 2004 (34)
Oct 2004 (17)
Sep 2004 (21)
Aug 2004 (59)
Jul 2004 (37)
Jun 2004 (31)
May 2004 (29)
Apr 2004 (52)
Mar 2004 (49)
Feb 2004 (49)
Jan 2004 (31)
Dec 2003 (48)
Nov 2003 (52)
Oct 2003 (29)
Sep 2003 (8)
Aug 2003 (5)
Jul 2003 (2)
Jun 2003 (2)
May 2003 (5)
Apr 2003 (2)
Mar 2003 (2)
Feb 2003 (3)
Jan 2003 (29)



 

The 6% Solution

Contributed by mm | April 15, 2004 10:00 AM PST

Selena Maranjian discussed the details of "the 6% solution" at Fool.com. The 6% solution, in short, is an arrangement in home purchase that both buyer and seller agree to put a 6% higher price in the contract and seller tunnels the 6% back to buyer in cash. If the deal goes thru, the buyer can expect to use the additional 6% to cover the closing cost, or even some of the downpayment.

To her credit, Selena explained the seller consession concept pretty well, and she accurately highlighted the limitation of the arrangement (appraiser needs to agree on the inflated price, and not all closing cost can be covered by seller's cashback).

However, being there during my home purchase exercise last year, I have to say this article can be improved for accruacy:

First, the 6% solution actually costs something to the seller. At least in my state (state of Washington), home seller needs to pay a sales tax of around 1% - 2% of the contract price. It is small amount, but a wise seller (and a qualified seller's agent) may still ask for some kind of consessions.

Second, the bank will surely ask for the final home-selling contract, so most likely the loan officier (and the appraiser) will know the existence of the 6% solution, which weakens the likelihood of a satisfactory appraisal price to make things work.

On the financial analysis front, Selena is saying:

"If we pretend for a moment that those costs add up to precisely $12,000, then what you've done is folded those closing costs into the mortgage. Points, title search, recordation fees, and all other closing costs -- most of which are not tax-deductible -- have effectively been included in your mortgage. Since your mortgage interest is tax-deductible, these costs have effectively become tax write-offs."

This statement is incorrect. The 6% solution does not turn the closing cost into tax write-offs because only the interest part of the mortgage is tax deductible. The buyer still needs to pay back the closing cost over the lifespan of the mortgage as mortgage principal, and this principal payback is not tax deductible. Furthermore, as another Fool.com article previously noted (and my blog), mortgage interest tax benefits does not kick in until all deductions surpass the standard deduction amount.

In addition Selena's comparison of the additional mortgage cost of the solution and the benefits of the solution is erroneous. In the example, Selena thinks the additional mortgage cost of the solution is $25,200 based on $70 extra monthly payment over the 30-year span. She then quantifies the investment potential of the saved closing cost as more than $200,000 over 30 years with 10% annual appreciation. She then drew the conclusion that "in this scenario, it can be well worth it."

This is like comparing apples and oranges: Selena didn't assign any time value to the $70 monthly payment while the $200,000 is the value of $12,000 after 30 year's investment (i.e. time value of money included). For a fair comparison, the opportunity cost of $70 monthly contribution at an annual appreciation of 10%, is in excess of $158,000. This is still lower than the investment value of $12,000, but the gap is not huge now. The gap exists simply because our expected invest gain (10%) is higher than the mortgage rate (8% in the example).

Actually, a detailed analysis should also include the fact that if the buyer rolls any "points" into the mortgage, it can no longer be deducted (only the interest on "points" will be deductible). If the buyer pays the points outright, he/she can usually deduct the full amount of the points in the first year. This is an important consideration because without points and if bank does not allow buyer to pay downpayment using seller consession, I can hardly imagine why closing cost will be anything close to $12,000.

More PFBlog Articles You Might Find Interesting ...



Read More ... 102 Posts In The Same Category










This page was last rebuilt at January 27, 2014 07:50 AM PST.
 

RSS FEED





PERSONAL FINANCE BLOGS I READ

Consumerism Commentary
Get Rich Slowly
My Money Blog
All Financial Matters
The Simple Dollar






.

Error 500 - Internal server error

Error 500 - Internal server error

An internal server error has occured!
Please try again later.



Copyright 2003-2014, PFBlog.com. All Rights Reserved. (Privacy Policy)