Who's using IO AND P&I loans?

Having gone IO on all my loans so far Ive decided to re-assess my strategy, I just bought a house I intend on moving in to a little later down the road because rents are almost as high as buying and I went principal and interest for the loan because the way I see it is I can get rid of wasted rents going nowhere and lower my LVR actively across the whole portfolio much faster.

Reading Jan's books she said the same thing, they used IO and P&I loans for investment, who else is doing this and how has it affected your portfolio over time?
 
All my loans are IO..

IMHO by electing to pay P&I all you are doing is effectively reducing your cash flow & thereby reducing your ability to increase your portfolio asset base further.

Whilst in your portfolio acquisition stage think of the "principle" portion purely as "savings". You are better off allocating those "savings" towards the holding costs and/or deposit of additional IP/s that you would otherwise not have been able to hold..... and further more increase your overall total portfolio exposure to more CG and maximising your net wealth faster.

Once you have completed the acquisition stage of your portfolio then you have the option to reduce debt using the increasing positive cash flow you have established from rising rental income across your portfolio and other forms of income available to you.

Hope this provides another perspective for you.
 
Last edited:
Yea I decided to go P&I because I get to rent it out for almost a year, claim tax, move into it and claim the 14k FHOG, That'll put my spa in and maybe create a bit of equity to borrow further, then save the money I pay in rent each week as it goes into my 'mandatory savings' home loan account.
 
W2BW,

Even if you go IO you can still pay off extra if you want to help lower LVR if looking to purchase another property. Some banks limit the % or amount you can pay each year. A few years back STG offer 5K per year whereas CBA was offerring 5 or 10% per year of loan could be paid off in extra payments.

Percentages and amounts may have changed but worth looking into.
 
IO with 100% offsett is away to go. I have I & P investment loan which I'll be switching to IO loan as soon as the fix term expires mid next year. There's No point paying P & I on investment loan.:)
 
IO with 100% offsett is away to go. I have I & P investment loan which I'll be switching to IO loan as soon as the fix term expires mid next year. There's No point paying P & I on investment loan.:)

I beg to differ, I currently have a I&P on my IP and has reduced my LVR and the amount of interest i pay each month, therfore increasing my ability refinance for my 2nd IP next yr....

However saying this I will most likely change all loans into IO to increase cashflow only due to some personal issues that need sorting out... ie ex girl friend,



Oh and good work W2BW, think I have already asked where you got your new IP/ PPOR but can you refresh us...


Cheers
 
This is a question I've been wracking my brains over for quite some time - both my IP's have P&I loans. The property experts I've read generally advocate IO loans, the point being to free up cash flow to fund further property purchases, and that paying down principal for an IP is 'dead money'.

I do agree IO is useful if you have limited cash flow with little left over after repayments, especially if you still have non-deductible debt to pay off.

However that aside, by using P&I on your IP, wouldn't that allow you to accumulate equity faster, which you could access when you refinance and still enable you to fund further IP purchases? And IO loans have to revert to P&I usually after 5 years, so you do need to pay your principal sooner or later anyway - and I wanted that to be sooner. Over the life of the loan, you'd be paying less interest, which I feel is the real 'dead money' here - interest cost you money!

I'm not entirely convinced though that IO loans save you that much in the way of cash flow from P&I, the difference being around $200-$300 per month say on a $300k mortgage at around 7% interest, so $2400-$3600 a year. So that would take around 10 years to save for another deposit, by which time property prices would be a lot different. (On this point, could anyone please clarify whether you still need to come up with a 10% cash deposit for a second IP purchase even if you have say 30-40% equity in your first IP?)

I do agree it reduces your immediate holding costs, but then it could also be viewed as just deferring your holding costs and paying it later and over a longer period.

Also, nearly all of the P&I repayment component during the first few years are interest anyway, so you would still get the tax deductibility for negative gearing. I'm not worrying if I start paying more principal and less interest over time and have less tax refunds, because that just means I'm getting more equity in my IP's - and isn't the end game here to have the return from your property outpace your costs?
 
Hiya

Nice and simple, io with 100 % offset, pay the P component into the offset acct.

All the perceived benefits of PI, with all the flex of IO

ta

rolf
 
Yeah Rolf, that sounds like a good plan! We are IO only but I have paid some principal back as we didnt have the right arrangements for offset accounts. That will change shortly (just doing the paperwork now) so I might just put more into the offset account instead of paying the principal. Just have to remember not to spend it!
 
Hi W2BW.

I personally don't have a problem with P&I loans.

Approx 95% of my loans are I/O but I recently did change one loan over to P&I and may change a few more over in the near future.

It probably depends on what stage of investing you are at and what your goals are.

I have always had intentions of eventually paying down/off debt. That will probably mean selling off some of the portfolio but reducing some of the debt (over time) with P&I loans may mean having to sell less IP's.

I know others will disagree with this strategy and that's ok.

You have to do what feels right for you and will help you reach your goals in the shortest amount of time.

Regards
Marty
 
However that aside, by using P&I on your IP, wouldn't that allow you to accumulate equity faster, which you could access when you refinance and still enable you to fund further IP purchases?
If you pay the same amount as P&I payments, but put the "P" portion into an offset, you achieve the same thing with regards to equity, but retain the flexibility of not having to pay the "P" portion if cashflow is tight.

Also, when applying for further loans, the new lender just looks at how much your repayments are, and doesn't care that some of a P&I payment is "compulsory saving". So having a P&I loan decreases your serviceability for future loans.
doublebrick said:
And IO loans have to revert to P&I usually after 5 years, so you do need to pay your principal sooner or later anyway - and I wanted that to be sooner.
Some loans are I/O for the life of the loan, and even if they're I/O then P&I, you can negotiate a further I/O term when the initial one is ending - which is what the experts would advocate.
doublebrick said:
you'd be paying less interest, which I feel is the real 'dead money' here - interest cost you money!
If you're borrowing to invest, you must believe you can earn a better return on that money than the interest rate on your investments. If that weren't the case, you'd leave your cash in the bank! So if you can earn 10% on money that the bank charges you 7% to borrow, wouldn't you want to have as much of the bank's money as possible?
doublebrick said:
I'm not entirely convinced though that IO loans save you that much in the way of cash flow from P&I, the difference being around $200-$300 per month say on a $300k mortgage at around 7% interest, so $2400-$3600 a year.
As stated earlier, have a look at how that effects your borrowing capacity, and thus what the opportunity cost is of not being able to re-invest as soon or as large - that's much more significant than the direct impact on cashflow.
doublebrick said:
So that would take around 10 years to save for another deposit, by which time property prices would be a lot different. (On this point, could anyone please clarify whether you still need to come up with a 10% cash deposit for a second IP purchase even if you have say 30-40% equity in your first IP?)
Most investors only save a cash deposit for their very first deposit; after that you redraw the equity in your other properties to fund deposits on further purchases. That will generally come around a lot more quickly than you can save the cash deposit, which is why it gets easier.
doublebrick said:
I do agree it reduces your immediate holding costs, but then it could also be viewed as just deferring your holding costs and paying it later and over a longer period.
Yes, it could - if you didn't invest the saved "P" payments. But if you're investing that "P" and earning more than the interest rate, you're in front by investing that money rather than giving it back to the bank.

A lot of your concerns sound like they're about confidence. If you're confident in your ability as an investor (and the market you choose to be in), then during the accumulation phase, you should aim to keep LVRs as high as possible (within comfort and prudence). If you felt that 80% LVR (or whatever level you went in at) was prudent at purchase, then it should still be prudent to be at that debt level a year or two down the track - particularly as the asset should be appreciating. The asset will eventually become cashflow positive whether you are on I/O or P&I, but all other things being equal, your portfolio will grow more quickly with I/O loans.
 
Hiya Tracy

Its all abput risk management isnt it.

Gets back to my basic question of

"whose risk is it anyway ?"

If you are holding High LVRs with the balance of the 20 % sitting in your offset account, you have transferred the risk to the lender or their insurer.

ta
rolf
 
I beg to differ, I currently have a I&P on my IP and has reduced my LVR and the amount of interest i pay each month, therfore increasing my ability refinance for my 2nd IP next yr....

However saying this I will most likely change all loans into IO to increase cashflow only due to some personal issues that need sorting out... ie ex girl friend,



Oh and good work W2BW, think I have already asked where you got your new IP/ PPOR but can you refresh us...


Cheers

Thanx Burty!

Its Bakewell, 3 bedroom house on 850sq metres, I paid median price to secure it because I couldnt bargain down in the current climate.
 
IO on my PPOR. Would have done P&I if i had known interest rates would fall so low, but since this will eventually be an IP its not a big deal if we aren't paying down the balance.
 
Ok, thanking everyone for their views, Ive now decided to change the loan to a 5yr IO with an offset account, I see the difference now and am still able to pocket the FHOG, it will save me having to pay out mandatory every week and I can still 'pay down the loan' over time if I feel like it, I feel this type of loan will get me to where I want to go faster and wont hold me back on the servicability side, I can always just move back out of it and start renting it again as an IP, After all, thats what it really is, it just saves me paying rent.
 
Thanks also to Tracey/Ozperp for your detailed reply.

Just want to note in terms of achieving flexibility, P&I loans also allows redraw on any extra repayments, which I assume would serve the same/similar function as an offset?

As an aside, is it the case that refinancing to obtain the equity is not always beneficial whether IO or P&I? Although we have falling interest rates now and therefore better cashflow and serviceability, the property may be revalued at a lesser value than what you anticipate so you might have less funds to borrow.
 
Thanks also to Tracey/Ozperp for your detailed reply.
You're welcome! :)
Doublebrick said:
Just want to note in terms of achieving flexibility, P&I loans also allows redraw on any extra repayments, which I assume would serve the same/similar function as an offset?
Good point - NO! Not to the ATO, anyway. Redrawing funds from a loan account has different tax implications than if you put funds in an offset and withdraw them from an offset account. See, for example, this thread.
Doublebrick said:
As an aside, is it the case that refinancing to obtain the equity is not always beneficial whether IO or P&I? Although we have falling interest rates now and therefore better cashflow and serviceability, the property may be revalued at a lesser value than what you anticipate so you might have less funds to borrow.
Two questions here.
1) Is it a good idea to pull equity out of an existing property? That depends what you want to do with the funds! If you think you can invest the funds and earn a return substantially better than your mortgage interest rate, then go ahead. :cool: If you're planning on taking an overseas holiday, and have used your offset as a place to park the funds while saving, then yes. :) If you didn't plan to take an overseas holiday and didn't save for it, but notice your PPR has gone up by $20K so you can borrow that to pay for a holiday, then that doesn't sound like great financial management, no. :rolleyes:

2) Could you end up with a low valuation and the bank asking you to repay some? Yes, that's possible, but unlikely. Banks generally would only order a re-valuation in extreme circumstances, eg really big market falls, high LVRs (>90%), and/or poor payment history.

If you want to check if you have any free equity, then ensure you retain control over the valuation process. Don't ask the bank to order a valuation, and put them in control! Find out who the bank's panel valuers are, then approach a valuer yourself - ie make yourself the client, not the bank - and order an assignable valuation, which will probably cost about $400 for a house.

If it comes in at the figure you want (ie high), then you then ask the valuer to "assign" the valuation to your lender (which seems to involve writing the lender's name on the cover ;)) and approach the lender, valuation in hand, and ask for an increase.

If the valuation doesn't come in higher, first try and persuade the valuer that they got it wrong. I've had about 50% success in persuading valuers to increase valuations when I gave them evidence as to why I thought their valuations were too low. If that doesn't work, but you feel confident that a higher valuation is justifiable, you could try paying your $400-ish again and ask another one of the panel valuers for a valuation. I recently had a 22% variation between two reputable valuers for my PPR, so don't assume that all valuers will put similar values on properties!

If you don't ultimately get a higher valuation, you simply don't tell the lender that you've been through this process, and try again in 6 months or a year (however long it takes for market conditions to improve).
 
You're welcome! :)

Good point - NO! Not to the ATO, anyway. Redrawing funds from a loan account has different tax implications than if you put funds in an offset and withdraw them from an offset account.

When I contacted my loan advisor for Challenger about why I was switching our loan to a Bank where we can have an offset account, something we cant have with Challenger, he said that we could put extra money into it, then when we needed it for whatever, pull it out again. :eek: I said, No Way you cant do that because it contaminates the loan as an Investment loan with the ATO. He continued to argue with me, and said he has been doing it for years with his investment loans :eek: :eek:

I suggested he contact my accountant, (he knows him well) and I havent heard back from him. Probably having a quiet mental breakdown.

I think people think because the ATO doesnt query them at the time it is compliant.
 
Back
Top