Curious about the potential advantages to a seller for doing a "subject to" sale where existing financing stays with the property after sale. Specifically, for a duplex with market value of $450,000. Existing loan of $225,000 at 3.625%, 30 year fixed with 28 years left on the loan would stay with the property.
As the seller, what premium or benefit could I expect for allowing the loan to be "assumed" by the buyer? As opposed to doing a standard sale where the buyer pays cash or obtains their own financing.
My personal experience in my market is I can generally get up to a 10% price premium for good owner / existing financing.
$225k of equity or about 50% down is a potential pitfall to this - it will lock out many buyers as this is a big entry fee and it makes for a far less attractive return on investment (cash on cash return).
If you allow the buyer to take the property subject to your existing financing (keep in mind this is different than a true assumption) you will still be on the loan and tied to the property in that way.
A better way might be to do a lower down payment and "wrap" your existing loan with a new loan for the buyer. IE: What if you sell for $475k with $75k down and provide the buyer with 7% financing on the remaining $400k? Your P&I on $225k at 3.625 should be around $1026 per month. Your new payment received in this scenario would be $2661.