April 8, 2002, Revised November 17, 2004, November 30, 2006, June 29,
2007, February 4, 2008
"Does it ever make sense to refinance into a mortgage carrying a higher
interest rate than the mortgage you already have?"
Very often it does not. Mortgage borrowers refinancing at higher rates
ought to use the 72 hour right-to-rescind period to ask themselves if
the deal is really in their best interest. See
Rescinding a Mortgage
Refinance.
Different Reasons to Refinance
Mortgage borrowers refinance for four reasons: to raise cash, to reduce
monthly payments, to reduce the risk of higher future monthly payments,
or to lower interest costs. Refinancing at a higher interest rate for
any of the first three reasons may be justified but often isn’t, for
reasons explained below. Refinancing at a higher interest rate to lower
interest costs is never justified, although there are some snake oil
salesmen in the market who would like to convince you otherwise. I’ll
explain their tricks further below.
Cash-Out Refinance
Refinancing to raise cash means that you borrow more than the balance of
the old mortgage. This is called a "cash-out refinance". Very often, the
rate on a cash-out refinance is higher than the rate on the mortgage
that is being paid off.
I can’t say that this is never a sensible thing to do. If a family
member is critically ill, and if a cash-out refinance is the only source
of cash for a life-saving operation, then you do it. Yet the number of
rate-increasing cash-out refinances that can be justified by dire
circumstances is very small. In all too many cases, the borrower had a
better option but didn’t realize it.
For example, Betty had a $210,000 mortgage at 7% and needed $18,000. She
took a cash-out refinance for $232,000 at 7.5%, which covered the
$18,000 she needed and $4,000 of settlement costs. She could have
obtained a second mortgage for $18,000 but decided against it because
the rate was 10.5%. That was a mistake.
What Betty overlooked was that if she took the second mortgage, she
would be paying 10.5% on only $18,000, while retaining the $210,000 loan
at 7%. With the cash-out refinance, in contrast, the rate on $210,000
was raised by .5%. Paying 7.5% on $232,000 costs more than paying 7% on
$210,000 and 10.5% on $18,000.
Unfortunately, the Truth in Lending (TIL) disclosures provided to Betty
encouraged her to make this mistake. They indicated an Annual Percentage
Rate (APR) of 7.60% on the cash-out refinance, and 10.90% on the second
mortgage. Illogically, the APR on her cash-out refinance did not take
into account the cost of raising the rate on $210,000 by .5%.
An APR on a cash-out refinance that is comparable to an APR on a second
mortgage would be based on the net cash raised, not on the total loan
amount. This "net-cash" APR was 14.82%, which was well above the 10.90%
APR on the second. If the net-cash APR had been provided to Betty, she
might well have avoided the mistake. See
The
APR on a Cash-Out Refinance.
The Federal Reserve administers TIL but don’t expect it to fix this
anytime soon. Meanwhile, you can compare the cost of a cash-out
refinance and a second mortgage using my calculator 3d,
Cash-Out Refi Versus Second Mortgage.
Refinance to Reduce Monthly Payments
While refinancing at a higher rate to lower monthly payments is nowhere
near as common as refinancing to get cash, it happens occasionally. The
payment can be reduced only if the remaining term on the existing
mortgage is short. This allows a lengthening of the term to reduce the
payment by more than the higher rate increases it.
Charles took out a 15-year mortgage in early 1994 at 6.5%, and has paid
down the balance to $200,000. But Charles’ income has unexpectedly
dropped and he can no longer afford the mortgage payment of $2,970. He
plans to refinance into a 30-year loan at 7% on which the payment is
only $1,331, but at a cost of $3,500.
At my suggestion, Charles asked his servicing agent whether it would be
possible to extend the term of his existing loan, or reduce the payment
to interest-only for 5 years. In cases where a servicing agent also owns
the loan, the agent may be willing to do this for a small fee to
accommodate a customer. However, the answer to Charles was "no", because
the agent did not own the loan and had no discretion to adjust the
terms.
In fact, the loan was in a pool of similar loans against which a
mortgage-backed security had been issued and sold to multiple investors.
Changing the terms of loans in pools against which securities have been
issued is forbidden. While the "securitization" of mortgages has driven
down interest rates by increasing the efficiency of the system, it has
eliminated the flexibility to negotiate changes in the contract. Charles
was forced to pay the $3500 in refinance fees, along with a higher rate,
to get the payment down.
Refinancing at a higher rate in this situation is justified because the
alternative is default. Nonetheless, the difficulties involved in trying
to modify the terms of existing mortgages is a weakness of the present
system. See
Mortgage Loan Modifications.
Refinance to Avoid an Increase In Payments
Borrowers with adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) who expect a significant
increase in the rate and payment at the next rate adjustment date may
find it advantageous to refinance into a fixed-rate mortgage (FRM).
While the FRM rate may be higher than the rate they are now paying, it
is lower than the future rate they expect if they hold on to their ARM.
In my experience, few borrowers who refinance for this reason make a
mistake. Read
Is Now the
Time to Refinance an ARM Into an FRM?
Refinance to Reduce Interest Costs
If the purpose is to reduce interest costs, it never makes sense to
refinance at a higher interest rate.
To an economist, this is self-evident, but it isn’t to many readers,
which is why I keep returning to the topic. Hardly a week goes by that I
don’t hear from confused homeowners who are being badgered by snake oil
salesmen (SOS) trying to convince them that their higher rates actually
cost less. Most of them work for Primerica.
These SOS believe their own spiel. In fact, several of them have pitched
it to me, in the expectation that once I understood it, I was bound to
endorse it. Well, I do understand it, and it is a scam. Here is a
typical conversation between an SOS and me.
SOS: Will you agree that the important thing is not the interest rate
but the total amount you actually pay in interest over the life of the
loan? [Note: this is the key point of the spiel. If the SOS gets you to
agree to this, you are well on your way to being conned.]
JG: No. The amount I pay in interest over the life of the loan has to be
related to the amount I borrow. If you reduce my interest payments by
reducing the amount I borrow while raising the price, you are doing me
no favor.
Let me make you a similar offer. Right now, you can buy 10 lbs of sugar
at $1 a pound, spending a total of $10. If you will agree that the most
important thing is the total amount spent on sugar, I will sell you 5
lbs for $1.50 a pound, or $7.50 in all. This will save you $2.50.
No one would be fooled by the sugar case, of course, yet many people buy
into the same argument in connection with their mortgage. Their
confusion arises from the fact that the "amount" you borrow has two
dimensions: the loan size, and the amount of time it is outstanding,
which depends on how fast you repay it. The SOS exploits this confusion
with examples such as the following:
SOS: Your present 6.60% mortgage has a balance of $200,000 and 300
months remaining to term. Over that period you will pay $208,881 in
interest. If you refinance into our mortgage at 8%, you will pay
$200,986 in interest, or $7,895 less.
JG: True, but you have reduced the amount I am borrowing, which is like
selling me a smaller bag of sugar at a higher price. Your mortgage is a
biweekly that requires me to make an extra payment every year. I don’t
need to raise my interest rate to make an extra payment. I can convert
my current loan to a biweekly for a setup fee of $200 or $300. This
would reduce my total interest payments to $169,614, which is $31,372
less than I would pay with your 8% mortgage.
Indeed, I can do even better by increasing my regular monthly payment by
1/12. This is the equivalent of one extra payment a year, the same as
with a biweekly, but the savings begin with the first additional
payment. Total interest payments in this case will be $167,849, or $1765
less than with the biweekly, and there is no setup fee. See
Simple Interest on a Biweekly Mortgage.
SOS: Our biweekly is unlike any other and generates far more savings for
the borrower.
JG: The biweekly you offer is only slightly better than the standard
biweekly, and the difference is far outweighed by your higher interest
rate.
The SOS make exaggerated claims for what they call a "simple interest
biweekly". It benefits the borrower by reducing the loan balance on the
day a payment is received. The benefit, however, is very small.
In the $200,000 mortgage at 6.60% referred to above, interest payments
on a simple interest biweekly are $167,306. This is only $543 less than
when the monthly payment is increased by 1/12. You only have to raise
the interest rate from 6.60% to 6.63% to eliminate the benefit. And if
you raise the rate to 8%, which is actually on the low side of the deals
promoted by the SOS, it is a loser big time.
Note: All the numbers cited above were drawn from a biweekly spreadsheet
that is now available by clicking on
Spreadsheets.