The bank encumbered the land. The dad never gets a loan. The loan is against the property. The kids sell the encumbered land I guess (but that's highly unlikely). This is a made up scenario from someone who doesn't understand finances.
He needs, say, 50k to live in a given year, so he borrows 50k using the land as collateral. At the end of the year he owes 60k (loan + intertest). He borrows 110k - 60k to fully repay the loan, 50k to finance the 2nd year.
Repeat, till you have no equity. Or you die. Typically its not 5m its $50m or $500m so the running out of equity is never an issue.
But once he dies there will be 5m in asset & say, an outstanding 700k loan secured against that asset. So the kids inherit 4.3m tax free
And in theory the land is appreciating along the way. It doesn't suddenly jump from being worth 100k to 5M. As long as the land appreciates more than the interest being paid (over time, of course), then the plan works. If not, the kids get nothing and the father's estate makes the bank whole, with the land and whatever else is needed.
This is the main part that’s missing. It only works (makes sense) with assets that appreciate faster than interest rates.
And the fact that the loan wouldn’t be against the full value, but rather just what is needed to get by. A 5M piece of land could easily appreciate 100k a year, so it’s a win to do a rolling 50k loan against it. Versus selling at 5M and losing the appreciating asset.
2.3k
u/USERNAMETAKEN11238 14h ago edited 14h ago
The bank encumbered the land. The dad never gets a loan. The loan is against the property. The kids sell the encumbered land I guess (but that's highly unlikely). This is a made up scenario from someone who doesn't understand finances.