Inherit home, refi immediately?
Couple fears lender's due-on-sale clause
By Benny Kass, Monday, April 6, 2009.DEAR BENNY: My husband and I inherited a home from my husband's uncle who passed away a few weeks ago. Will the lender expect us to refinance the home or can we just assume it even if it is a conventional loan? --Karen
DEAR KAREN: Unless the existing loan was from a private person, it is most likely covered under the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982. This federal law puts restrictions on the ability of a lender to exercise the "due on sale" clause that exists in most mortgages (also called deeds of trust). One of these restrictions reads as follows: "With respect to a real property loan secured by a lien on residential real property containing less than five dwelling units, including a lien on the stock allocated to a dwelling unit in a cooperative housing corporation, or on a residential manufactured home, a lender may not exercise its option pursuant to a due-on-sale clause upon ... (5) a transfer to a relative resulting from the death of a borrower. ..."
Accordingly, you should advise the lender of the death, and just continue paying under the terms and conditions of the old mortgage.
However, do you know what the interest rate is on that property? Rates are currently very low, and if you can get a better rate -- and assuming that you and your husband can qualify for a new loan -- you should consider refinancing.
DEAR BENNY: I plan to sell a portion of my ranch where I live and use the proceeds to buy a house in the city as my primary residence. I will be keeping the house and some of the land on the ranch for occasional weekend and eventual retirement purposes. Will I be able to avoid the capital gains tax on the land sale? Does that tax apply only to the sale of a house?
Also, I paid cash for the land and will be able to pay cash for the new house. In today's environment, since I have the means, is it a good idea to avoid a mortgage and forfeit the tax benefits? --G.
DEAR G.: Your first question is easy. If you sell any real property, you have to pay the applicable capital gains tax. You should talk with your financial advisor, since you are probably eligible for the up to $250,000 exclusion of gain (up to $500,000 if you are married and file a joint tax return.)
Your second question is very difficult to answer, since much depends on your own financial situation. While I do not scoff at the benefits of deducting the mortgage interest you pay, the fact remains that too many people overrate those benefits. For example, if you are in the 25 percent bracket, that means that for every dollar of interest you pay to your lender, you can deduct only 25 cents. That means that the remaining 75 cents is not doing you any good.
I personally believe that most people who can qualify for a mortgage should get one. I have too many clients who are "house rich and cash poor." They have paid off their mortgage, but they are unable to pay the real estate tax or the insurance for the house. They wanted to pay off their loan, so they tapped into their savings, but now they don't have enough money to live on. ...CONTINUED
All rights reserved. This article may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.


You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Darryl Love on April 6, 2009 - 8:34pm.
I always love your answers, Benny, but I have a question following up on the man who wants to sell his ranch land (most of it), while holding on to the ranch house for personal use. He mentioned holding the land for use as part of his retirement and buying a house (with existing case) in the city to live in until he fully retires.
What an enviable position. But,. . .
Depending on what he wants to accomplish, should he consider doing a multiple assets exchange? The ranch house could still be withheld for personal use, but in many states the zoning laws would prohibit further division of the farm acreage for another residence--for the new farmer. Hence, the value of some of the property might be diminished if not bundled together. As far as retirement benefits, he might also be ahead to trade/exchange, now, and sell out when he retires for, possibly, less tax bite. Of course, only the gentleman and a local professional Exchangor can answer some of these points, but what is your general view on such opportnities? Do they work out well for retirement planning and tax deferral?
Thanks for your good work. Darryl