Ask Paul: Should I pay a lump sum off my home or investment property?

Hi Paul. I borrowed $296,000 two years ago to buy my own home.

After lots of extra repayments I have $111,000 remaining at an interest rate of 2.88% with $540 fortnightly repayments.

Ignoring offset, this would effectively be repaid in nine years. I also have an investment property with $271,000 remaining over 27 years at 3.09%.

I have $10,000 to make a lump sum repayment on one loan. According to a loan calculator, the lump sum repayment on my home would save $2794 interest over the remaining life of the loan, but it would save $12,498 over the remaining life of the investment loan.

We often hear it's best to pay non-deductible debt first, but is that always the case? In this situation, would it make more sense to pay $10,000 off the investment property? - Michael

Good question, Michael, and I am very impressed that you have done a solid analysis.

The key is here is the best result for you today. And this depends upon your tax rate. If you earn between $37,001 and $90,001, including the Medicare levy, you will pay 34.5% tax.

Your point about non-deductible debt is spot on. With your home, the 2.88% costs you 2.88%. But with the deductible interest on your investment property, your real rate is 3.09% less your tax rate.

So if you are in the most common tax bracket, the real cost to you of your investment loan is 3.09% minus 34.5%, meaning the investment loan is costing you about 2%.

This will differ if your income is higher or lower. Above $180,001, for example, you would pay some 48% in tax, making deductible debt even more attractive. So add one more number to your calculations: your tax rate.

Then I'd suggest you pay off the more expensive loan. Either way, I'd pay this into an offset account, if possible, giving you access to your money.

Get stories like this in our newsletters.