Survey: Which of you finances with TA loans?

Hello,

I am curious to know how many people here are financing their construction project with a TA loan (repayment suspension loan). We have now gone through various financing options and what we particularly like about the TA loan is the possibility to save with Riester subsidies and repay. There is also a tax advantage. The subsequent taxation is not to be evaluated for now. It’s not much. Furthermore, special repayments are possible at any time. We have an offer for 240,000€ TA, split into 120k each so that the Riester subsidy applies to both. One child. During this period, 612€ is paid monthly for the first 13 years. After that, for another 10 years, 1,290€. The loan is thus basically paid off after 23 years. Are there any other disadvantages to the TA loan apart from the deferred tax through Riester?

Who provides the TA loan? So, who is offering it to you and who is the lender? I guess directly the building society or BSK through brokers.

In my opinion, this model is now outdated as a complete financing and should only be considered as one component among several, depending on the personal situation, because a TA loan actually drives the interest costs to be paid up.

BSK-TA loans should amount to a maximum of 1/3 of the total costs. Commission-dependent advisors sometimes quickly forget something like this.

Matter of opinion - we did exactly the same (just without Riester, because I don't trust it) and our monthly burden is noticeably lower than with traditional loans that were offered to us (interest rate difference 0.7-0.9%). But that was also due to the loan-to-value ratio, which was not great for us - apparently only the building society banks played along there.

Prepayment after the end of the BS savings in unlimited amounts was a nice side effect for me...

Of course, this loan is somewhat more expensive overall, but over the entire 30-year term it was "only" just under 10,000 euros. However, I prefer to follow the rule "liquidity before profitability."

I agree with Toxicmolotow. In TA, nothing is paid off because the interest rate difference has to be quite significant for it to be worthwhile. Additionally, there is the subsequent taxation and the risks of the Riester [pension]. One may not intend to sell the house, but there are some cases where it may not be possible to resolve it otherwise.

I am more in favor of profitability and security rather than liquidity and have taken out a classic annuity loan with 2% initial repayment and 5% special repayment.

Hello everyone, but I haven't seen the exact advantage of the TA loan compared to a "normal" financing yet. (Riester excluded, as that is complete nonsense to me as well). Is the entire loan handled through the BSK with TA, and the advantage is then that you get the money immediately and don't have to fully accumulate your points as with a normal building savings contract to get the loan? But what other direct advantages does it have compared to a normal financing with the annuity loan? Could someone explain this to me again?

Long terms with low interest rates and apparently (as with us) more willingness to take risks – if you can get a normal annuity loan for roughly the same rate, I would always prefer that too.

And yes, you get the money immediately and then initially only pay interest (plus saving into a building savings contract, which is interest-bearing at a minimal rate).

As I said, for us the drawback of higher total financing costs was very manageable over the long term with significantly higher monthly liquidity. And I also have security there – plus more flexibility than with (almost) any annuity loan.

It depends...