My monthly article from ACEP NOW is on debt management, an important topic for most physicians, especially in the first half of their career when they may have a mortgage, student loans, and perhaps even some consumer debt.
Question. I am a new attending for a private employer and owe a lot of money. I have the following debts:
- $400,000 5/1 adjustable-rate mortgage at 3.5 percent
- $60,000 student loan at 7.9 percent fixed
- $80,000 student loan at 6.8 percent fixed
- $40,000 student loan at 5.4 percent fixed
- $20,000 student loan at 4.5 percent variable
- $20,000 seven-year car loan at 5 percent fixed
- $11,000 on a credit card at 11 percent
- $8,000 on a credit card at 15 percent
I would also like to get started investing. My employer offers a pretty standard 401(k) and will match the first $6,000 that I invest. My stay-at-home spouse and I are also excited about starting backdoor Roth IRAs. How can we decide when to pay back loans and when to invest?
A. This is a complex problem and one to which there is no definite right answer. The correct answer for you will depend on a lot of factors, such as current interest rates, total debt in relation to your income, expected return on investments, the fixed versus variable nature of your loans, job security, your tax situation, your asset protection plan, and your comfort level with debt. There are, however, some guiding principles you can apply when making such decisions.
10 Guiding Principles of Physician Debt Management
#1 Physicians, in general, are entirely too comfortable with debt.
Many doctors live primarily, or even entirely, on borrowed money for nearly a decade while in school. At times, it seems like those debts are not real due to their large size and changing interest rates. This long association with debt encourages physicians to assume that owing hundreds of thousands of dollars is somehow OK. It isn’t. Although there are exceptions, most of the time paying off debt will improve your financial situation as much or more than anything else you are likely to do.
Buying depreciating items, such as automobiles, on credit is a “rookie mistake.” Likewise, credit cards aren’t for credit. Those who find themselves routinely carrying balances on them would be better served using a debit card or even cash. Paying down debt not only improves your cash flow but is far better than the usual alternative—spending the money.
#2 Improve debt when possible.
Some debt is more easily managed than other debt. If you can convert a debt that is nondeductible, high-interest, variable, and/or short-term into a debt that is tax-deductible, low-interest, fixed, and/or long-term, it’s usually a good idea to do so.
If going for student loan forgiveness isn’t right for you, refinancing your student loans at a lower rate is a good idea. Given all the 0 percent credit card offers out there, it seems silly to carry 15 percent interest on credit card debt. If you still have a mortgage greater than 5 percent, refinancing should be priority before you lose your opportunity.
#3 Always consider the after-tax interest rate on your debt.
When your debt is completely deductible, use the after-tax interest rate to make comparisons. As a general rule, student loan interest is deductible as a resident but not as an attending. Conversely, mortgage interest may not be deductible as a resident due to the standard deduction being more than your itemized deductions, but may be as an attending. Auto and credit card loans are generally not deductible. If your marginal tax rate is 24 percent federal and 5 percent state, a fully deductible 5 percent mortgage has an after-tax interest rate of 5 percent x (100 percent – 24 percent – 5 percent) = 3.55 percent.
#4 Variable-rate loans are riskier than fixed-rate loans.
If interest rates rise, variable-rate loans can become very burdensome. So when deciding whether to pay down a variable loan versus an equivalent fixed loan, choose the variable one. That doesn’t mean variable-rate loans are a bad tool. Rather than paying the lender extra to run the interest rate risk, you’re taking it on yourself, and that will usually get you a lower rate. The shorter the time period before you can pay off the loan, the less risk you are taking.
#5 Always consider the effects of inflation on your debt.
I once had a student loan with very attractive terms. I borrowed $5,000 in 1993 at 8 percent interest. However, the interest did not accumulate nor did I have to make payments while I was in college, medical school, residency, or the military. When I left the military in 2010 (17 years after I took out the original loan), I still owed $5,000. However, thanks to inflation, $5,000 in 2010 was not worth nearly as much as it was in 1993. It was as if I had borrowed $5,000 and paid back just $3,000. Inflation is good for borrowers, as long as the interest rates are fixed, because the loans are paid back with depreciated dollars.
#6 Paying down debt can increase your risk to creditors.
Sometimes, carrying debt can provide asset protection. Some states, such as Texas and Florida, have large homestead exemptions, meaning a creditor cannot take your house very easily. In other states, the exemption is very small. Because home equity may not be very well-protected in those states, paying down a mortgage instead of investing in a better-protected asset may increase your risk to creditors. Likewise, an automobile whose value is equal to the loan on it is not particularly attractive to a creditor. Keep in mind that asset protection considerations often run counter to investing considerations in situations such as these (ie, that asset protection will cost you money).
#7 A 401(k) match is part of your salary.
Always make sure you contribute enough to your 401(k) to get the entire match from your employer. Failing to do this is simply leaving money on the table. Getting any available match is generally the single best investment available to you.
This tax-protected “space” in 401(k)s, Roth IRAs, and similar accounts is gone forever if you do not max it out each year. These accounts lower your overall lifetime tax bill, protect your money from creditors in most states, and allow your money to grow faster than it would otherwise.
#8 Paying off high-interest debt is a great investment.
Paying down a 15 percent loan is the exact equivalent of making an investment that pays a guaranteed 15 percent. Investments like that are exceedingly rare, so if you have one available to you, take advantage of it. An investment growing at 15 percent will quadruple in value in less than a decade, and remember that compound interest works both ways.
#9 Maximizing retirement accounts is preferable to paying down low- and moderate-rate debt.
While paying off debt at 4–8 percent may be preferable to investing in a taxable account, a retirement account contribution is usually better than both options. The cutoff between where investing is better than paying off debt is inexact at best and relies on a lot of factors, including your comfort level with debt, the expected return on your portfolio, and the availability of additional retirement account contributions. However, few would argue that you should invest while carrying debt with an interest rate greater than 8 percent. Likewise, paying off low-interest-rate debt is less attractive than investing, especially within a retirement account.
#10 Becoming debt-free is more behavior than math.
Mathematically speaking, the best way to pay off debt is to choose the debt with the highest interest rate and pay it off first while paying the minimum due on the debts with lower interest. However, people are much more likely to stick with a debt-reduction plan if they feel they are building momentum as they go. The best way to build momentum is to pay off the smallest debts first. In the end, either method is fine, but pick the one you can stick with.
Agree? Disagree? When do you think it's wiser to invest, or even spend, than pay down debt? Comment below!
Nothing wrong with buying a certified pre owned auto with these very low int rates
Better than leasing
Wonderful, wonderful article and good general recommendations. However, I had a hard time wrapping my arms around Principle #5 regarding the effect of inflation on debt. I could be wrong with my extrapolation, but you seemed to suggest that delaying to pay your fixed-interest rate debt is ‘good’ because you get to pay it then with depreciated dollars. Debt is not a pet and should not be deferred if you can afford to pay them down. Generally speaking, there are very few guaranteed investments that can beat paying down on debt. And you always have to involve RISK in all calculations. Often, people forget about that when making their decisions about debt pay down.
But thanks for a wonderful article, as usual. I very much enjoyed it
As Jim states in the articl the rate at which it becomes better to pay down debt vs contribute to investments is inexact however does exist.
He gave a nice example in #5 where he had a 0% interest loan for what sounds like about 12 years. Not taking the loan in the first place would have been great, but if you have to take a loan to help pay for school and can defer payments for 12 years, then I don’t know many that would pass up such a great offer. Another example is school loan debt. Lets say I have $100,000 in my pocket. Lets also say I have $100,000 dollars worth of government school loan debt and I am 30 years old. Finally let’s say the interest rate on this loan is 2%. What should one do with the $100,000 grand in your pocket? A good argument can be made to either invest it or pay off the loans. The above scenario is a very real scenario for many of us and it is a constant debate as to the better option. I personally would love to never have accumulated the school loan in the first place, but this is unrealistic for most of us. Whether the interest rate is 2% or 6% may make a difference, but where that line is drawn is likely different for everyone.
In Section 5 he is talking about a loan where everything including interest was being deferred. In that case you might as well carry the debt since it costs you nothing to do so and you eventually pay it back with depreciated dollars, in essene saving you money. This would be an exception to the maxim that you should try to get rid of debt ASAP.
For a fixed rate loan that is accumulating interest during deferral, or a fixed rate loan that you’re already making payments on, it generally makes more sense to get rid of the debt if you can.
I disagree. I have student loans fixed at 1.625%. Why would I use extra cash to pay those when it’s less than the historical rate of inflation? It’s free money. Not only that, but if I invest the money instead, getting more than 1.625% over 30 years is easy. From a pure math perspective, investing wins easily. For higher interest rates, it’s less obvious.
Are you suggesting that if I had a fixed 2% loan and inflation were running at 10% that I would be better off paying it now because “debt is not a pet?” Look, I don’t like debt any more than the next guy, but sometimes you have to look at the math too.
I think this is an exceptionally informative and well-written article. Some of the subtlety of what you say may be lost on the novice new attending who asks the initial question, but if s/he reads it carefully the article is laden with useful pointers. I like that you articulate various guiding principles, and then explain when one maxim supersedes another.
I liked the point about maximizing tax-protected space which is a use-it-or-lose-it scenario every year. One of my dark secrets as a young attending is that while I max out my 401K every year and get a generous employer match to boot, I am also carrying a 401K loan for a small fraction of my 401K balance. I do this because I while I have some short-term cash flow needs, I don’t want to needlessly pay taxes by not maxing out my 401K contribution, and I don’t mind paying myself interest. I see the loan portion of my portfolio as a nice fixed-income alternative to the current low-yield bond options that moves a 100% stock portfolio closer to the efficient frontier by being 80% stock and 20% debt at 5% guaranteed yield.
Suppose my current budget only allows me to contribute $8,000 to my 401K, instead of the full $18,000. I could only contribute $8,000 and take the additional $10,000 as income. After tax, that additional $10,000 in income would net me ~$7,000 in cash. Or, I could contribute $10,000 pre-tax into my 401k and then withdraw $7,350 as a 401k loan. After paying $350 to myself (my 401k) as interest, I still have $7,000 in cash, but I now have an extra $2,650 in my 401K that would otherwise be going to the tax man.
I consider this a dark secret because of your first point about physicians being too comfortable with carrying debt, so I wouldn’t encourage folks to borrow tons of money from their 401k for no good reason, but it does have some mathematical merit.
There is a Boglehead, Livesoft I believe, who borrows all the money out of his wife’s 401(k) and invests it elsewhere because the investment options in her 401(k) are terrible. I’m not a huge fan of 401(k) loans because the terms are so bad. If you lose your job you only have something like 60 days to pay it off. But you’re right about the math.
For the circumstances of the person who wrote into you, I’d have a few more suggestions:
1) Pay off those credit cards first to fix one’s credit score. Wait a month or two after doing so, and then check it via credit.com/creditkarma.com/creditsesame.com, or via a credit card vendor if they offer that service for free.
2) Once credit is fixed then refinance the car loan to 1.49% at Digital Federal Credit Union. Also refinance the student loan debt with SoFi, probably at a fixed rate since I don’t foresee this person paying off their loans early with the habits thus far established.
3) Now put one’s nose to the grindstone, cut out all frivolous spending, and pay down debt in highest to lowest after-tax interest rate until it’s gone.
Great article. Love reading about debt reduction since I am in the throws of paying off >$250k currently. You must have studied or listened to Ramsey since most of your writing (and your style) on debt reduction reminds me of his teaching.
Ramsey is pretty good at getting people out of debt, no doubt about it.
I like to read your posts at work. Unfortunately, the ACEPnow website doesn’t pass my organization’s filter. There must be some tawdry stuff on there! 😉
Sorry to hear that. I don’t reproduce the articles in their entirety on my site due to copyright issues, fair use issues, and search engine optimization issues.
“Remember that compound interest works both ways.” — Wise words! Thanks for the share.
What are your thoughts on mortgage debt for investment properties that are rented but far underwater? I have 2 rentals that put together total about 225K in mortgages. I’d love to have them off my balance sheet but would lose between 50-70K in order to do so. I get torn between the thought process of: losing 70k today to wipe out 225k of debt (which doesn’t sound bad when put that way), or: waiting it out and paying down the mortgages and continuing being a landlord and having those mortgage payments not going directly into my IRA’s.
Maybe I could get some good ideas?
Thanks,
Erik
There is no right answer. The right answer depends on what happens in those markets in the future. . If they recover relatively quickly, you should stay put. If they don’t, you should sell now, even at a loss. Be aware of the sunk cost fallacy. Your loss is already gone, so evaluate the investment looking forward from where you’re at.
Thanks for the wisdom about sunk cost fallacy. It might be worth talking with accountant about the loss on property sale reducing my taxes as well.
Thanks again!
Yes, your losses are deductible, but limited to $3K a year against your active income (but unlimited against passive income.) And you can carry them forward until you can use them up too.
It depends whether you find landlording to be a profitable use of your time and energy. I don’t, so I don’t own any rental properties. If I were a real estate investor / landlord person, then discarding sunk costs, I would look at the properties as a new opportunity. If they are positively cash flowing, but have a negative net value, they might be a great investment. Imagine someone approached you and offered to pay you $70K to take over a business with a steady and positive cash flow but a negative balance sheet. The holy grail in real estate investing is positive cash flow with $0 down, but -$70K down is even better than that. If it has significant negative cash flow, you probably wouldn’t assume ownership of the business even if someone paid you $70k to do it, so I feel that is a key issue.
The other question would be whether it is a non-recourse loan you can just walk away from and leave the bank holding the bag and/or whether you could get some kind of loan modification that would lower the payments and improve cash flow.
Hi Xeno,
These 2 properties have traditional 30 yr mortgages. If I decide to keep them (likely)I will refinance to 15yr mortgages. Total rental income between the 2 is 15K/yr, and total ownership costs are currently around 18k/yr. I have good tenants and no problems besides normal maintenance. I think listening to Dave Ramsey has made me super freaked out about debt and then I cringe when I see the mortgage balances-all the while forgetting that these 2 homes can serve as long term investments. I did not buy them for them to be investements, but the economy left me with no other real option. I appreciate your input!
THANKS
It sounds like the properties are already negatively cash flowing $3K/year. Would any repairs or vacancies that come up mean you are cash flowing even more negatively? Ignoring speculation on whether real estate prices will go up or down (because ignoring inflation, both are historically equally likely at any given point in time), you need to figure out whether you will come out ahead by laying out $70K today to clear your balance sheet or by investing that $70K into something else and slowly putting money into your investment properties until they are no longer under water. Potentially, refinancing to a lower-rate 15-year mortgage will increase the magnitude of negative cash flow (since your monthly payments go up), but shorten the time until you are above water. Presumably, once the mortgage is paid off in 15 years you will have positive cash flow and you will definitely have a saleable, unencumbered asset. The question is how much you’d have to put into the property over the next 15 years to get to that point. You can construct two scenarios with the same cash flows from you today and over the next 15 years to be able to make a fair comparison.
Let’s say option A is to pay $70K now to get up to 0 equity and then restructure the loan as a 15-year fixed rate loan of $150K at 4%, which would be $1,100 per month in interest plus principal, plus taxes, insurance, maintenance, repairs, vacancies, etc. we stipulate with option A that you have a negative cash flow of $6K/year for the next 15 years. At the end, you own what is now a $150K property free and clear. We will assume that the property’s price has kept place with inflation, so in nominal dollars it’s worth maybe $202K, assuming 2% inflation.
Option B is you pay $70K today to get this thing off of your balance sheet and then invest $6K/year over the next 15 years into a total stock market fund. Same cash flows. Assume 5% real or 7% nominal growth of your investment. You would be left with a $158,000 nominal investment.
Obviously adjusting assumptions and calculating how much sweat equity you would need to put in to be a landlord over the next 15 years can provide some clarity to your dilemma. Also, whether you have the $70K sitting in your checking account making no interest or whether you’d have to take out an unsecured personal loan at 10% interest would be a factor, too.
I want to refer you to another post, actually a book review, that will help you run the numbers to give yourself better answers and fair comparisons:
https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/great-real-estate-investing-book/
Make sure you use accurate numbers and compare appropriate cash flow in each scenario.
I will check out the link/book…
For the calculations in option B, you had the “negative” cash flow amount of 6K being invested per year rather than being lost on the rentals. In that instance, I would have sold the homes and then no longer would have had any mortgage payments. Should those now absent mortgage payments be added into the investment equation?
Thanks
Best to look at total return when looking at any investment, rather than just cash flow.
You want to compare apples to apples. In both of the artificial scenarios I presented, you are going to pay $70K on day 1, followed by $500/month for the next 15 years. In option A, you’re keeping the rental property but still bringing $70K cash to the table to improve the balance sheet and be able to get a decent mortgage. After 15 years you have a $202K property completely paid off to show for the money you put in. In option B, you lay out the same $70K in cash on day 1, but then sell the place on day 1. In order to make the comparisons fair, you spend the next 15 years investing $500/month into the stock market and end up with a $158K stock portfolio to show for the money you put in. If you have to make 3 x $10,000 repairs over the next 15 years ( roof, furnace, air conditioner), then the numbers would favor selling now and investing in the stock market. If you get a 10% abnualized return in the stock market over the next 15 years, that would favor investing in the stock market. If you can make the place cash-flow neutral (instead of draining $6k/yr) by bringing $70k to the table and refinancing the mortgage, then option A would be much more compelling, etc.