Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 356

Payment deferrals more expensive than borrowers expect

It has been reported that more than 320,000 home owners and 170,000 businesses have put loan repayments totalling $6.8 billion on hold since banks first announced support for borrowers as the Covid-19 pandemic unfolded.

Most banks introduced a loan deferral arrangement where loan repayments could be suspended for up to six months. But it’s important to note that this is a payment holiday, not debt forgiveness. Interest will continue to accrue on outstanding loan balances and will be capitalised.

The financial implications of taking up such offers is therefore worth considering.

How much extra will be repaid? 

Assume a 25-year principal and interest loan, established five years ago. The current variable interest rate is 3.5%, and the current minimum monthly loan repayment of $2,030 has just been locked in. The outstanding loan balance is $350,000 and loan repayments will be postponed for the next six months.

If at the end of the deferral period, the borrower resumed paying down the loan at the minimum amount of $2,030 per month, then the term of the loan would be extended by a little more than 12 months, and an additional $12,544 would be paid over the term of the loan.

Alternatively, in order to repay the loan in full by the end of the original 25-year term, some $72 per month extra would be required, being an additional $4,765 paid over the loan’s term.

Loan payment deferral is expensive

Deferring loan repayments therefore comes at a significant cost, and the full implications need to be understood prior to undertaking such an approach. Perhaps reduced payments instead of no payments could be discussed with banks, to lessen the blow on the other side. For example, an arrangement whereby interest only is payable for the six months, and no principal.

Then CBA Chief Executive, Matt Comyn, said the following after the Reserve Bank cut interest rates by 0.25%:

“We will also help up to 730,000 customers by reducing repayments to the minimum required under their loan contract from 1 May. On average, this will release up to $400 per month for customers and create up to $3.6 billion in additional cash support for our economy. Customers will be able to opt out after the change is effective should they wish to keep their current repayment”.

When the interest rate on a variable rate property loan reduces, the amount required to pay the loan out over the original term will also reduce. But many CBA customers choose to continue to pay the higher amount, thus reducing the loan term. And if they do want to pay the minimum, they must contact the bank to ask for payments to be reduced. That is, it is an 'opt in' arrangement.

But what CBA proposed is the reverse. An 'opt out' arrangement whereby the loan will automatically revert to the minimum required payment on 1 May, unless the customer actively vetoes the procedure.

This will also have consequences for borrowers. Five years ago, the official cash rate was 2.25%. So let’s assume our 25-year principal and interest example loan established five years ago, commenced at a variable interest rate of 5.5%. The original loan amount was $392,000 with a monthly loan repayment of $2,408. Assume the monthly repayment was left unchanged over the five years. So that now, with the loan balance at $350,000 and the variable interest rate at 3.5%, the minimum monthly payment required to pay the loan out in 20 years as already noted, is $2,030. That is, $378 less per month.

But if the customer opts out of the proposed CBA arrangement, maintaining repayments at $2,408, the loan will be paid out in 15.8 years, cutting 4.2 years off the loan term, and saving about $31,000 in interest.

Most people do not respond to 'opt out' requests. There is little doubt that customers will unwittingly or otherwise not 'opt out'. And if that happens, the financial consequences for the borrower are significant. While the CBA says this approach will 'help up to 730,000 customers' in terms of cash flow, one wonders if it really does help overall.


Tony Dillon is a freelance writer and former actuary. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor.



Most viewed in recent weeks

Have the rules of retirement investing changed?

In retirement, we still want to reduce stock volatility while generating cash flows. The two needs have not changed, but the reward expected in the old days from interest payments has gone. What should we do?

18 Aussie names for your watchlist

A Morningstar stock screener reveals a cross-section of companies with competitive advantages that are trading at material discounts to estimated value. This is a list of 18 highly-rated names worth watching.

Buffett and his warning about 'virtually certain' earnings

While many investors are happy to invest in any online companies, Warren Buffett focusses more on the quality of future growth, buying companies whose earnings are 'virtually certain' in 10 or 20 years from now.

Hamish Douglass on what really matters

Questions on the stock market/economy disconnect, how to focus long term, technology's growing role, income in a low-rate world, Modern Monetary Theory and endless debt and the tooth fairy.

Kate Howitt: investing lessons and avoiding the PIPO trade

Kate Howitt identifies the stocks she likes and the disappointments, gives context to the increasing role of retail investors, and explains why the market is more of a 'voting not weighing' machine than ever before.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 379

It is trite and obvious to say the future is uncertain, and while COVID-19 brings extra risks, markets are always unpredictable. However, investing conditions are now more difficult than ever, mainly because the defensive options for portfolios produce little income. We explore whether investing rules have changed with new input from Howard Marks.

  • 15 October 2020

Latest Updates

Weekly Editorial

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 381

There is a popular belief that retail investors do not even achieve index returns due to poor timing of investing and selling decisions. The theory is that they buy after markets rise as confidence grows, then sell in panic when markets fall, and miss the recovery. This 'buy high sell low' tendency loses the advantages of long-term investing and riding out the selloffs. But the evidence for this belief is not convincing.

  • 29 October 2020
Investment strategies

Gemma Dale: three ways 'retail' is not the dumb money

There is a popular view that retail investors panic when markets fall, but in the recent COVID selloff, they were waiting in cash for buying opportunities. What's equally interesting is the stocks they bought.

Investment strategies

Unlucky for some: 13 investment risks to check

Risk isn’t something to be avoided altogether. To achieve returns beyond the government bond rate, some level of risk must be accepted. Assessing which risks to take and calibrating them is the investor's challenge.

Responsible investing

Four reasons ESG investing continues to grow

Although Australian investors are among the most ESG-aware in the world, with the vast majority wanting responsible and ethical investments, there are still some misconceptions to dispel.


Why caution is needed in Aussie small companies

Over the last 20 years, smaller Australian listed companies have outperformed larger companies but with greater volatility. Following a strong run in the last six months, the smaller end is looking expensive.

Financial planning

The value of financial advice amid rise of retail investors

Financial advice has moved well beyond simply recommending investments, with five major components to quality advice. Helping clients avoid potentially disastrous mistakes is often underestimated.


The 2020 US presidential elections

The US is days away from a presidential election with major repercussions for economic policy and investments in the US and the world. Views from First Sentier Investors and BNP Paribas Asset Management.

SMSF strategies

Can your SMSF buy a retirement home for you now?

It sounds appealing to acquire a property now through your SMSF with the hope of residing in the property once you retire, but there are issues and costs to check that may vary by state.



© 2020 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use.
Any general advice or class service prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, has been prepared by without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. Refer to our Financial Services Guide (FSG) for more information. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.