Why a 50-Year Mortgage Won’t Really Help First-Time Buyers

With housing affordability at record lows, some have floated the idea of introducing 50-year mortgage terms to make homeownership more accessible — especially for younger first-time buyers. While the concept sounds appealing, the financial reality tells a different story.

At a 6.125% interest rate, the monthly payment difference between a traditional 30-year mortgage and a hypothetical 50-year mortgage is surprisingly small — roughly $358 less per month on a $500,000 loan. While that might seem helpful at first glance, the long-term costs and practical drawbacks make the 50-year option far less beneficial than it appears.

First, most lenders would charge a higher interest rate for such an extended term, which would reduce — or even erase — that modest monthly savings. Second, borrowers would pay hundreds of thousands more in total interest over the life of the loan while building home equity at an exceptionally slow pace.

For young buyers trying to get a foot in the door, the real challenge isn’t the length of the mortgage — it’s saving for the down payment and qualifying under tighter lending standards. Stretching the loan term to 50 years may sound like relief, but in reality, it’s just a longer and more expensive path to ownership with little immediate benefit.

In short, a 50-year mortgage isn’t the answer to affordability — it’s just more debt stretched thinner.