Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 132

Fixed rate loan break costs – the need for transparency

If interest rates fall and borrowers decide to repay a fixed rate loan, the bank will require the customer to pay a 'break funding fee' (sometimes called an 'early termination interest adjustment'). Banks manage the interest rate risk on their fixed rate loan book by locking in similar term liabilities. If the customer discharges the loan prior to maturity after interest rates fall, the bank will be left with no asset matching the higher cost of funds. The break funding fee compensates the bank for this cost.

The role of break funding costs

Break funding costs first came to prominence in the early 1990’s when interest rates fell rapidly. Borrowers sought to refinance themselves at progressively lower interest rates. The ability of banks to charge break funding costs was crucial in preserving margins or covering costs. One mortgage securitiser at the time, FANMAC, wrote fixed rate mortgages with no break fees and experienced significant refinancing from customers switching into lower rate loans. The increased repayments flowed through to bond holders who found the duration of their investments reduced markedly. Significantly for FANMAC, the borrowers remaining were those who had difficulty refinancing and were of a lower credit quality, adversely affecting the performance of their book.

When explained to the borrower, most understand the need for a break fee, however they are often surprised at the size of the compensation sought by the bank. It also should be pointed out if rates were to rise, allowing the banks to replace the loan at a higher rate, it is usual for the customer to receive a payment.

Transparency of calculation method

Over the years there has been greater emphasis on disclosure of fees and charges so a borrower can make an informed decision when comparing loan products. This trend to greater transparency does not appear to apply to banks disclosing break funding calculations.

Recently, a client of one of the authors repaid over $2 million dollars in fixed rate loans. The loans were taken when interest rates were higher and the bank, as was its right, charged the customer a break fee exceeding $80,000. This is abnormally large and the client, while understanding why the fee was charged, justifiably requested the basis on which the fee was calculated.

In order to calculate the break fee only a few bits of information are required:

  • the remaining term of the loan
  • the balance outstanding
  • the funding cost when the loan was written
  • the funding cost when the loan was discharged.

If a loan has three years remaining, the balance is $200,000 and rates are 2% lower, the break cost will be $12,000.

Obviously, the bank must have access to the above information to calculate the fee, yet banks are reluctant to provide the calculation details. Numerous requests for this information to satisfy the client have fallen on deaf ears. If a particular bank consistently charges higher break fees due to the way it locks in funding, this is important information to be taken into consideration when taking out a fixed rate loan.

Even if the bank has made an honest mistake, there is no way of checking and the client is left feeling as though the bank is concealing something. Since the size of the discharge fees often surprises borrowers, it strengthens the case for greater transparency.

Calculation based on wholesale not retail rates

Another borrower known to one of the authors took out a fixed rate loan and understood the bank would pass on any economic cost if the loan was discharged early. The client decided to sell her property and entered into an unconditional contract to sell, however on discharge discovered that the bank had calculated a $13,000 break cost. The client believed that there would be no economic cost as retail rates had not moved since the time she took out the loan. This is not to suggest the bank was wrong. It does make the point that many borrowers, whilst believing they understand the terms of their loan, do not understand that break costs will be calculated based on the bank's internal rates, not the customer rate. The rates used are also too much at the discretion of the banks.

Given interest rates are currently relatively low, if fixed rates rise, then a mortgage discharge allows the bank to replace the loan at a higher rate and accordingly the customer should receive the benefit. Understanding how this benefit is calculated is important. When interest rates rise a borrower with a low fixed rate loan views their loan favorably and they may be reluctant to discharge their loan. If they are confident they will receive an accurate economic benefit on discharge this may influence their behaviour.

Banks should be more transparent in how they calculate break fund costs and disclose the basis of those calculations to their clients. If the banks were obliged on loan settlement to disclose the funding rate, it would assist in estimating future break funding costs or benefits. Mortgage brokers should also properly explain break fees to potential clients, and quantify what these costs may be depending on different rate outlooks. Borrowers are then able to make a more informed decision.

 

Peter Cooper is Managing Director at Cooper Financial Connections and Keith Ward is the former Head of Retail Banking St George Bank.

 

  •   29 October 2015
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Is it time for an Australian 30-year fixed rate mortgage?

The housing market is heading into choppy waters

A perfect storm for housing affordability in Australia

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

The investment that sidesteps the new tax traps

Tax rules have changed, but many investors are still using yesterday’s strategies. Insurance bonds may offer advantages for those seeking greater control, tax efficiency and certainty about their wealth.

Testamentary trusts have secured the CGT exemption

Treasury’s latest CGT reform draft delivers a win for testamentary trusts and deceased estates, exempting estate-derived gains from the 30% floor. However, questions on death and divorce rollovers remain unresolved.

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Latest Updates

Planning

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

Investment strategies

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

Economy

Population growth masks Australia’s productivity problem

For years, investors have benefited from a seemingly reliable growth story. But recent national accounts raise uncomfortable questions about what has really been driving Australia’s economy and whether that can continue unchecked.

Investment strategies

Why tomorrow’s winners may not be today’s index leaders

The stocks that built retirement balances over the past decade now dominate many portfolios. The new challenge is whether these companies can continue meeting the increasingly high expectations embedded in today's share prices.

Investing

What earnings surprises reveal about future returns

Sometimes the most important information in an earnings result isn't the number itself. It's the possibility that the market's assumptions have been fundamentally wrong and future earnings may look very different.

SMSF strategies

Individual SMSF Trusteeship directly liable for ATO fines

A rarely discussed detail buried in SMSF structures could dramatically change who wears the cost when something goes wrong. With penalties rising, a decision many dismissed as administrative may deserve a second look.

Investment strategies

The currency bet you didn’t know you made

Buying global shares means making two bets: on the companies and on the Australian dollar. Most investors consciously choose only the first. Last financial year, the second bet cost 8.5% in returns for many investors.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
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. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. 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.