Builder-Financed Construction
This is the
simplest approach with important advantages to the buyer, including not
having to worry about the builder's financial capacity, or the complexities
involved in the alternatives discussed below. It is discussed in
Should the Builder
Finance Construction?
Separate
Construction Loans and Permanent Mortgages
The obvious
downside of two loans is that the buyer shops twice, for very different
instruments, and
incurs two sets of closing costs.
Construction loans usually run for
6 months to a year and carry an adjustable interest rate that resets
monthly or quarterly. The margin will be well above that on a permanent
ARM. In addition to points and closing costs, lenders
charge a construction fee to cover their costs in administering the loan.
(Construction lenders pay out the loan in stages and must monitor the
progress of construction). In shopping construction loans, one must take
account of all of these dimensions of the "price".
Some lenders (primarily commercial
banks) will only make construction loans. Others will only make
combination loans. And some will do it either way.
Note: Interest on
construction loans is deductible as soon as construction begins, for a
period up to 24 months, provided that at the end of the period you occupy
the house as your residence.
The permanent loan is no
different from that required by the purchaser of an existing house, or by
the buyer of a new house on which the builder financed construction. Indeed,
the advantage of the two-loan approach relative to the combination loan
discussed below, is that the buyer retains freedom of action to shop for the
best terms available on the permanent mortgage.
Combination Construction/Permanent Mortgages
The major
talking point of the combination loan is that the buyer only has to shop
once, and has to pay only one set of closing costs. The danger, however, is
that the buyer will overpay for the permanent mortgage because the
arrangement has limited his options.
Lenders offering combination loans
typically will credit some of the fees paid for the construction loan
toward the permanent loan. The lender might charge 4 points for the
construction loan, for example, but apply 3 of the points toward the
permanent loan. If the borrower takes the permanent loan from another
lender, however, the construction lender retains the 3 points. This makes
it difficult to compare combination loans with the two-loan
alternative.
For example, suppose the
buyer wants to compare the cost of the construction loan offered by the
combination lender cited above with an independent construction loan offer
at the same rate plus 2 points. The buyer can get the construction loan for
1 point provided he also takes the permanent loan, or for 2 points while
retaining his freedom of action to shop for the best deal on a permanent
loan. Which is the better deal depends on how the combination lender prices
the permanent loan relative to the competition.
This is not easy to
determine. While you can compare current price quotes on permanent loans by
the combination lender with quotes from other lenders, these don't mean
much. The actual price won't be set until after the house is built, and at
that point the combination lender has an incentive to over-charge. In my
example, he can over-charge by up to 3 points, because that is the amount he
retains if the buyer goes elsewhere.
The upshot is that I would
not take a combination loan unless a) the current combination price quote
was at least as good as the best quotes from separate construction and
permanent loan lenders; and b) the combination lender was willing to
index the price of the permanent loan so that I knew exactly how it would be
set when the time came.
If the combination lender
insists that you will get the market price, it is time to bail out and go
with two loans.
Copyright Jack Guttentag
2006