Over the weekend, the administration bounced the idea of having a 50-year mortgage. This was followed up by the FHFA director, Bill Pulte, stating that they are working on a plan. The reactions to this announcement are across the board with some embracing it as the miracle that will help create more affordability to others viewing it as a subprime product. Mortgage originators have been quick to post rates comparing 50-year amortized mortgages to what may be available with a 30-year. Even if this product becomes available, in my opinion, it’s highly unlikely a 50-year amortized mortgage will have the same rate as a 30-year fixed. Just look at how mortgage rates are priced when you compare a 30-year to a 15-year amortized mortgage. Click here for current mortgage rates for your personal scenario.
Average rates from 11/07/25 from Optimal Blue. This is not a rate quote.
Mortgage rates for a 40-year amortized mortgage are higher than rates for a 30-year conventional. It just makes sense to me that rates for a 50-year amortized mortgage means that it’s very likely that the interest rate will be higher than a 30-year amortized rate. Although the payment may be lower with this mortgage, the home will cost more in the long run.
This morning, I ran some numbers to compare what the payments could look like for a 30-year, 40-year and possible 50-year amortized mortgage. The scenarios below are not a “rate quote” – this is for an example only. Remember, we don’t even know what, when or if a 50-year mortgage will become available.
This is based on a sales price of $625,000 with a 20% down payment. I know many first-time homebuyers may put less down. For this article, I’m wanting to illustrate the cost of the 50-year mortgage. The payments below include estimated property taxes and homeowners insurance.
- 1st Column: 30 Year Fixed Conventional
- 2nd Column: 50 Year amortized mortgage – based on having the current rate as the 30-year in column 1
- 3rd Column: 50 Year amortized mortgage – based on having the same rate as what is posted on the last column (40 Year)
- 4th Column: 40 Year Fixed Mortgage
Again, I’m assuming that IF the 50-year became available, that we would see rates closer to what’s available with a 40-year… but who knows?
When you look at the estimated cost over 4 year when comparing the longer-term mortgages to the 30 year fixed rate. 
It’s all going to boil down to what interest rates will be available to the borrower. Shrugging off $2,264 over 48 months with a rate the same as what’s offered with the 30-year fixed is a lot easier than $12,336, in my opinion. Of course, this is assuming that the borrower is making regular scheduled payments and not chunking down anything extra towards principal and that they homeowner doesn’t refinance in 4 years.
This comparison compares loan balances less the forecasted home values (all the same home values because it’s the same home 😀) from the above scenario, over 10 years. This snapshot shows that the 50-year could potentially cost the homeowner around $58,000 and that’s assuming the same rate as the 30 year fixed.
On a side note, Japan’s 50-year mortgage, called the “flat 50” has been an option due to higher home prices. The program has an age limit requiring the mortgage to be paid in full before the homeowner turns 80, so they have to acquire the mortgage before they are 30 years old.
If the 50-year program doesn’t have an age limit, like Japan’s flat-50 mortgage, it could help retirees have more wiggle room with their monthly cashflow. Although, I would also recommend that they consider a reverse mortgage, if finances are tight.
Maybe the 50-year program allows them to payoff high-interest credit card debt while they buy their first home.
I’m not saying that a 50-year amortized mortgage is a bad mortgage. As a mortgage professional, I review my clients’ finances and provide them with information to help them make informed decisions and create a plan for their homebuying journey. My ultimate wish for my clients is that they can afford to buy a home, become debt free and have a financially secure retirement.
What we know today is that we don’t have a 50-year mortgage. With reviewing someone’s current debt scenario, it’s quite possible that with putting less down and opting to instead, pay off a debt, that similar monthly savings (that would be better for the borrower) could be created.
I also believe that if the 50-year mortgage product became available, it would increase demand for homes which tends to push home prices higher. What we really need is significant amount of affordable housing to be created. Hopefully with having Pulte, a builder, in charge of the FHFA, something can be done about that.
By the way, if you’re thinking about buying or refinancing a home, I am happy to help you!
Please leave a reply