Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 54%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$69 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Take Your Forum Experience
to the Next Level
Create a free account and join over 3 million investors sharing
their journeys and helping each other succeed.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
Already a member?  Login here
General Real Estate Investing
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated almost 2 years ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

124
Posts
41
Votes
Nader Hachem
  • Dearborn, MI
41
Votes |
124
Posts

Do 40 year mortgages make more sense for Buy and Hold?

Nader Hachem
  • Dearborn, MI
Posted

I've been seeing some recent news on 40-year mortgages. I'm not sure if they even apply to investment properties, but i'm going to assume they do. Would this actually make more sense for Investment properties? Especially in a high interest market? Will this make things easier to get into a first rental property?

Now, one of the biggest cash-flow killers is the high interest rates, i.e. - high monthly mortgage. Would 40-year mortgages make it easier to get into long-term investment properties? I'm speaking on lower cost properties around 150-250K. I know this will also prolong the loan and in the end you end up paying more total for the property. 

My thought is that 40 year will allow you to get into these properties easier, since payment is lower which in turn allows for cash flow.. then maybe down the line you could refinance into a shorter loan.

Just some thoughts, i'd like to hear others thoughts too.

Most Popular Reply

User Stats

13,398
Posts
19,435
Votes
Joe Villeneuve
#5 All Forums Contributor
  • Plymouth, MI
19,435
Votes |
13,398
Posts
Joe Villeneuve
#5 All Forums Contributor
  • Plymouth, MI
Replied

If I could get a 100 year loan I would be the first one in line. This would reduce the monthly payment, as you stated, and increase your CF.  The interest is paid for by the tenant out of the rent, not you, so the increase in the total interest is a non-issue.  The paydown on a mortgage, whether it is a 15, 30 or 100 is back loaded,...meaning the mortgage payments are front loaded in the payments schedule.

Take the same property/loan, and run amortization tables for 15, 30 and 40, and you'll see how little of the actual principle is paid in the first years of a loan.  Look even farther down the years of these loans, and you'll see how long it take for the payoffs to accumulate to a number that really matters.

Equity accumulation from appreciation is much greater (it better be) on your properties than from the paydowns.  Your mortgage has nothing to do with your appreciation or your property value, and your appreciation has everything to do with property value.

Loading replies...