- Country singer Tim McGraw not sorry for slapping female fan: ‘Things happen’
- Iraq vet cited for owning 14 therapeutic pet ducks
- White House takes credit for drop in unaccompanied children at border
- International crises be damned, Obama’s fundraising trip must go on
- Friend of bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev found guilty of impeding probe
- Train with MH17 plane crash bodies leaves rebel town in Ukraine
- Half of Colorado voters are OK with Hobby Lobby decision, poll shows
- HIV-killing condom to soon hit shelves in Australia
- Estonia pulls plug on Steven Seagal over praise for Putin
- Lawyer: Pelvic exam pics cost Hopkins $190 million
Mortgage Q&A: Slightly higher rate has a plus
Question of the Day
With interest rates remaining at historic lows, I want to reiterate my long-standing position that homeowners considering a refinance should seriously consider choosing a slightly higher interest rate to avoid the typically high cost of refinancing.
It is true that over time, points and closing costs are eventually recouped through a lower interest rate. But the payback period often is long, and there’s never a 100 percent certainty that the borrower will hold the loan long enough to negate those costs.
This is especially true for homeowners seeking a 15-year fixed-rate mortgage. I want to revisit a conversation I recently had with a client who agreed to take out a zero-cost refinance, even though he was leaning toward paying closing costs in order to get a lower rate. Let’s do some number crunching.
My borrower is deciding whether to refinance his $500,000 mortgage to a 15-year fixed-rate loan with a 4.25 percent rate and no closing costs, or a 4 percent rate with about $4,800 in closing costs that he would pay out of pocket. He plans on staying in the house and never refinancing again.
Which deal is better?
Most would think that paying the $4,800 in upfront fees to secure a 4 percent rate over 15 years is the way to go. The numbers suggest otherwise. I did some calculations and came up with the following numbers.
- The payment difference between a 4.25 percent and 4 percent loan is $63 per month. Over the 15-year period, the borrower saves $11,340 by taking the lower rate.
- Because the upfront cost is $4,800, we must subtract this cost from the total payment savings of $11,340. The savings shrinks to $6,540.
- Because the borrower had planned to pay the $4,800 out of pocket, it is money that disappears. Under the zero-cost program, he can retain the $4,800 and invest it over the long term. Even though interest rates are at record lows, he can invest in Treasury bonds at about 3 percent. $4,800 invested at 3 percent annually will net him $2,160 over a 15-year period. Since this is money that can’t be earned if it is used to pay closing costs, it also must be subtracted from the savings. Now our savings gap is reduced to $4,380.
- Finally, there’s the issue of the mortgage interest tax deduction. I’m no tax expert, but the last time I checked, mortgage interest is still deductible and closing costs are not. My amortization schedule tells me that the 4.25 percent plan pays $11,331 more in interest than the 4 percent plan. Assuming my borrower continues to have an income to support the mortgage payment, he pays fewer taxes under the 4.25 percent plan.
Assuming a 33 percent tax bracket, the tax savings would amount to $3,739 over the 15-year period. Subtract this from our shrinking savings gap and our overall savings by taking the 4 percent rate is now only $641.
These are all very reasonable assumptions and numbers don’t lie. It says that if a borrower indeed holds the loan for the full term, he saves only $641. But if he pays off the loan anytime earlier than about 14 years, he made the wrong decision.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
TWT Video Picks
U.S. appetite for drugs begets violence migrants are fleeing
- IRS seeks help destroying another 3,200 computer hard drives
- Jewish woman booted from JetBlue flight over fight with Palestinian
- Edward Snowden to work with Russia on anti-spy technology
- Rihanna, Dwight Howard delete #FreePalestine tweets
- YOUNG: A sinking presidency, deeper after November?
- PRUDEN: A deadly enemy within exacerbating immigration crisis
- MERRY: Handicaps in Hillary's way
- Driver who killed teen on bike sues family for $1.3 million
- Bill Maher blames Hamas for Gaza violence: 'Do you really expect the Israelis not to retaliate?'
- HUMPHRIES: 'Hes the Worst President in 70 Years'
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq