Skip to content
×
PRO
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
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
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 about 12 years ago,

User Stats

1,493
Posts
450
Votes
James H.
  • Investor
  • Fort Worth, TX
450
Votes |
1,493
Posts

To pay or not to pay off your primary residence

James H.
  • Investor
  • Fort Worth, TX
Posted

This discussion was cropping up in another thread about a different topic, and I wanted to hear more feedback from other members about what they prefer. As a primer, I am going quote @Rich Weese contributed as I find it was very interesting - hope you don't mind Rich.

" Brian and Jon H- Here is my contrarian view to owning your OWN residence free and clear and why I don't do it. I like my contrarian view for the following reasons . I DO agree you should have A house free and clear.
1. I have at least a home free and clear.
2. I am able to obtain a better loan on OWNER OCCUPIED home.
2. I do have a sense of security with F&C home- and it doesn't have to be the residence.
3. I live in a nicer home, higher LTV, lower rate, etc and still have a F&C home if everything goes to pot.
4. If everything only goes PARTIALLY to pot, the lender probably won't want my highly leveraged home I live in. We all know people who are under water for over 3 years and lender hasn't taken the home.
5. I get interest deductions on my residence, which I wouldn't if it was F&C.
6. I still have the sense of security with other F&C home.
7. I have more $ to invest elsewhere because F&C home is not as expensive and only there for severe emergency.
8. The extra $$ to invest makes me more $$, more writeoff etc-which I wouldn't otherwise have.

Just a contrarian view for BP members to digest. Rich"

Loading replies...