Home financing with interest loan and Riester or without Riester

Except if the insurance company gets into financial difficulties and is therefore exempt from performance. And the company cannot cover it financially. What I mean to say: don’t sell the bear’s skin before the bear is shot.

It is a large insurance company and the amounts are secured. It is similar to banks. In the worst case, the government steps in. Or do you think they would abandon the people who provide for their retirement? The company from which I receive the subsidy is also not the smallest. So the probability of a total failure is close to zero. Besides, in our case it is a subsidy and not a subsistence amount without which we cannot live.

And if everyone thought that way, no one would take out a:
- disability insurance-
- life insurance-
- accident insurance-
- retirement provision insurance
or build a house. After all, the construction company could also go bankrupt...

It is a large insurance company and the amounts are secured. It is similar to banks. In the worst case, the government steps in. Or do you think they would abandon the people who provide for their retirement? The company through which I receive the subsidy is also not one of the smallest. So the probability of a total failure is close to zero. Besides, in our case, it is a subsidy and not a living amount without which we cannot live.

And if everyone thought like that, no one would take out a:
- disability-
- death-
- accident-
- retirement insurance
or build a house. After all, the construction company could also go bankrupt...

It is not even about the insurance company going bankrupt, but only about fundamental financial difficulties. You can feel free to inquire and read about it. The occupational pension insurance policies can become benefit-free relatively quickly. And I don’t know about you, but often the contracts are concluded between the employee and the company, so the company has to cover the losses. Which could immediately ruin them. But that goes too deep into the topic and goes beyond the scope here. It is exclusively about the warning that I personally would NOT rely on the payout for loan repayment.

By the way, with other products it is also sometimes astonishing how much is paid in and then guaranteed to be paid out. You really have to check carefully.

But it also has a 20-year fixed interest period instead of 15 years.

For me, the options with a building savings contract are not an option.

Have you looked in detail at the offers to see what the credit costs are?

What exactly do you mean by that? Sorry for asking.

In the end, your son decides. But he has not understood the Riester product and its drawbacks.

Do you mean the uncertainty with the deferred taxation?

It’s not even about the insurance company going bankrupt, but just about basic financial difficulties. You’re welcome to look into it and read up on it. The insurance policies for company pension schemes quickly become non-performing. And I don’t know how it is with you, but often the contracts are made between the employee and the company, so the company has to cover the shortfalls. Which could easily ruin them. But this goes too deep into the topic and would be beyond the scope here. It’s exclusively about the warning that personally, I would NOT rely on the payout for loan repayment. By the way, with other products it is sometimes astonishing how much is paid in and then guaranteed to be paid out. You really have to check that carefully.

It doesn’t make much difference for us, since not many have company pension schemes. Probably about 5-7% of the 700 employees. And the company can easily cover the money and the shortfall.

What exactly do you mean by that?
Sorry for asking.

At first reading, I had understood your son's rejection because of higher interest rates and explained it with 20 instead of 15 years of fixed interest.
But your side meant the repayment per month...
Nevertheless, in your place, I would take a look at the total costs and not just the monthly repayment.