UK university student finance - should I use my sponsorship money to pay the debt?
"Let me run some simplistic numbers, ignoring inflation. You have the opportunity to borrow up to 51K. What matters (and varies) is your postgraduation salary. Case 1 - you make 22K after graduation. You pay back 90 a year for 30 years, paying off at most 2700 of the loan. In this case, whether you borrow 2,800 or 28,000 makes no difference to the paying-off. You would do best to borrow as much as you possibly can, treating it as a grant. Case 2 - you make 100K after graduation. You pay back over 7K a year. If you borrowed the full 51, after 7 or 8 years it would be paid off (yeah, yeah, inflation, interest, but maybe that might make it 9 years.) In this case, the more you borrow the more you have to pay back, but you can easily pay it back, so you don't care. Invest your sponsorships and savings into something long term since you know you won't be needing to draw on them. Case 3 - you make 30K after graduation. Here, the payments you have to make actually impact how much disposable income you have. You pay back 810 a year, and over 30 years that's about 25K of principal. It will be less if you account for some (even most) of the payment going to interest, not principal. Anything you borrow above 25K (or the lower, more accurate amount) is ""free"". If you borrow substantially less than that (by using your sponsorship, savings, and summer job) you may be able to stop paying sooner than 30 years. But even if you borrow only 12K (or half the more accurate number), it will still be 15 years of payments. Running slightly more realistic versions of these calculations where your salary goes up, and you take interest into account, I think you will discover, for each possible salary path, a number that represents how much of your loan is really loan: everything above that is actually a grant you do not pay back. The less you are likely to make, the more of it is really grant. On top of that, it seems to me that no matter the loan/grant ratio,  ""borrow as much as you can from this rather bizarre source"" appears to be the correct answer. In the cases where it's all loan, you have a lot of income and don't care much about this loan payment. Borrowing the whole 51K lets you invest all the money you get while you're a student, and you can use the returns on those investments to make the loan payments." Borrow the lot (as your family recommended)! The extra money will come in useful when you want to buy a house and move back to the area where your employer is. The government loan in the UK is a fantastic system, just a shame they are charging you so much in tuition fees...
"You have 1998-2011 income-contingent student loans, where the interest rate is the lower of (1% + base rate) or RPI (retail price inflation). For the next few years the it's likely to be (1% + base rate) as interest rates stay low and inflation shoots up. These loans only need to be repaid in proportion to your salary, and if they aren't repaid for long enough (e.g. the holder takes a career break for children) they are written off. So all-in-all, they are pretty good debt to have: low interest rate, and you might not have to repay them ever. It's likely that your mortgage will have a significantly higher rate than the student loan, so you'd be better off reducing your mortgage. Also, the higher deposit might mean you can get a lower interest rate on the whole mortgage because the lender will see you as a lower risk, so the return from ""investing"" it in your mortgage would be even greater than the raw interest rate. Having the student loan outstanding might make some difference to the ""affordability"" check for your mortgage payments, but lenders will be very familiar with how they work. Reducing your mortgage payments with the higher deposit should easily counterbalance that. Your own suggestion is to invest the £30K in a ""reasonably safe portfolio"" making 5%. There'll inevitably be some risk in that - 5% is a relatively high return in today's climate - but if you're willing to take that risk, you can investigate the effect on your mortgage to see if it's worth it or not." Looking at https://www.gov.uk/student-finance/who-qualifies, it says: You can only apply if: As you meet all three requirements I think you are counted as a English student in every respect. I would advise applying as soon as possible though to verify this. EDIT: also, getting a British passport anyway might not hurt; it makes sense as you've spent almost all your life here, and it would insulate you against any issues that might arise if Britain ends up leaving the EU. "Some very general advice. Lifestyle borrowing is almost always a bad idea. You should limit your borrowing to where it is an investment decision or where it is necessary and avoid it when it is a lifestyle choice. For example, many people need to borrow to have a car/house/education or go without. Also, if you are unemployed for a long period of time and can't find work, charging up the credit cards seems very reasonable.  However, for things like entertainment, travel, and other nice-to-haves can easily become a road to crushing debt. If you don't have the cash for these types of things, my suggestion is to put off the purchase until you do. Note: I am not including credit cards that you pay off in full at the end of the month or credit used as a convenience as ""borrowing""" "The more I think about this the more I think you are actually better off letting it go to collections. At least then you would be able to agree an affordable repayment schedule based on your real budget, and having a big dent in your credit score because it's gone to collections doesn't actually put you in any worse position (in terms of acquiring credit in the future) than you are now.  Whoever is the creditor on your original loan is (IMO) quite unreasonable demanding a payment in full on a given date, especially given that you say you've only been made aware of this debt recently. The courts are usually much more reasonable about this sort of thing and recognise that a payment plan over several years with an affordable monthly payment is MUCH more likely to actually get the creditor their money back than any other strategy. They will also recognise and appreciate that you have made significant efforts to obtain the money. I'm also worried about your statement about how panicked and ""ready to give up"" you are. Is there someone you can talk to? Around here (UK) we have debt counselling bureaus - they can't help with money for the actual debt itself, but they can help you with strategies for dealing with debt and will explain all parts of the process to you, what your rights and responsibilities are if it does go to court, etc. If you have something similar I suggest you contact them, even just to speak to someone and find out that this isn't the end of the world. It's a sucky situation but in a few years you'll be able to look back and at least laugh wryly at it." If you have (other) high interest debt, say over 8%, pay it back first. Else, you are likely best off paying this loan back and getting the money working for you long term. If you need a new roof because your house is full of buckets that fill up every rain :) then that's most likely the item at the top of the list. If you need a new roof because you don't like the color, I'd do something else with it. If you are in the US and the 'education loan' has the same caveats attached as your average student loan, I would eye that one with intent if the roof can soldier on for a few years as is. The simple reason for this is that a student loan would be the one debt that you list that you can never get rid off unless you actually pay it off, no matter what happens (IOW student loans aren't bankruptable). Disregard this if the caveats in the first sentence don't apply... "You promised to pay the loan if he didn't.  That was a commitment, and I recommend ""owning"" your choice and following it through to its conclusion, even if you never do that again.  TLDR: You made a mistake: own it, keep your word, and embrace the lesson.  Why?  Because you keep your promises.  (Nevermind that this is a rare time where your answer will be directly recorded, in your credit report.) This isn't moralism. I see this as a ""defining moment"" in a long game: 10 years down the road I'd like you to be wise, confident and unafraid in financial matters, with a healthy (if distant) relationship with our somewhat corrupt financial system.  I know austerity stinks, but having a strong financial life will bring you a lot more money in the long run. Many are leaping to the conclusions that this is an ""EX-friend"" who did this deliberately.  Don't assume this. For instance, it's quite possible your friend sold the (car?) at a dealer, who failed to pay off this note, or did and the lender botched the paperwork.  And when the collector called, he told them that, thinking the collector would fix it, which they don't do. The point is, you don't know: your friend may be an innocent party here.  Creditors generally don't report late payments to the credit bureaus until they're 30 days late.  But as a co-signer, you're in a bad spot: you're liable for the payments, but they don't send you a bill.  So when you hear about it, it's already nearly 30 days late.  You don't get any extra grace period as a co-signer. So you need to make a payment right away to keep that from going 30 late, or if it's already 30 late, to keep it from going any later.   If it is later determined that it was not necessary for you to make those payments, the lender should give them back to you.  A less reputable lender may resist, and you may have to threaten small claims court, which is a great expense to them. Cheaper to pay you.  They say France is the nation of love. They say America is the nation of commerce.  So it's not surprising that here, people are quick to burn a lasting friendship over a temporary financial issue.  Just saying, that isn't necessarily the right answer.  I don't know about you, but my friends all have warts.  Nobody's perfect.  Financial issues are just another kind of wart.  And financial life in America is hard, because we let commerce run amok.  And because our obsession with it makes it a ""loaded"" issue and thus hard to talk about.  Perhaps your friend is in trouble but the actual villain is a predatory lender.  Point is, the friendship may be more important than this temporary adversity.  The right answer may be to come together and figure out how to make it work.  Yes, it's also possible he's a human leech who hops from person to person, charming them into cosigning for him. But to assume that right out of the gate is a bit silly.  The first question I'd ask is ""where's the car?"" (If it's a car). Many lenders, especially those who loan to poor credit risks, put trackers in the car.  They can tell you where it is, or at least, where it was last seen when the tracker stopped working.  If that is a car dealer's lot, for instance, that would be very informative.   Simply reaching out to the lender may get things moving, if there's just a paperwork issue behind this.  Many people deal with life troubles by fleeing: they dread picking up the phone, they fearfully throw summons in the trash.  This is a terrifying and miserable way to deal with such a situation.  They learn nothing, and it's pure suffering.   I prefer and recommend the opposite: turn into it, deal with it head-on, get ahead of it.   Ask questions, google things, read, become an expert on the thing. Be the one calling the lender, not the other way round.  This way it becomes a technical learning experience that's interesting and fun for you, and the lender is dreading your calls instead of the other way 'round.  I've been sued.  It sucked.  But I took it on boldly, and and actually led the fight and strategy (albeit with counsel).  And turned it around so he wound up paying my legal bills.  HA!  With that precious experience, I know exactly what to do... I don't fear being sued, or if absolutely necessary, suing.   You might as well get the best financial education.  You're paying the tuition!" "So you work, and give a small irregular amount to you parents.  You live with very low expenses.  Assuming you make a bit below the average salary in the UK, you should be able to save around £1000.  If you found a part time job could you save double?  I bet you could. So why do you need credit?  Why do you need a credit score? Having poor or no credit can be remedied by having a large down payment.  Essentially the bank asks, if this person could afford the payment of this loan why have they not been saving the money?  You could save the money and either buy the thing(s) you desire with cash (the smartest), or put 50% down.  Putting 50% or more down turns you into a good credit risk despite having no credit history.   In case you missed it:  why not just save the money and buy it for cash?  Why have compounding interest working against you?  Why do you want to work for the bank? Making the interest payments on loans in order to build a credit score is just silly.  It is an instance of a ""tail wagging the dog""." Yes, there are times when co-signing is the right choice. One is when you know more about the person than the loan issuer does. Consider a young person who has just started working in a volatile field, the kind of job where you can be told on Friday that you only get one shift next week but things might pick up the week after, and who makes maybe $12 an hour in that job. You've done the math and with 40 hour weeks they can easily afford the loan. Furthermore, you know this person well and you know that after a few weeks of not enough shifts, they've got the gumption to go out and find a second job or a different job that will give them 40 hours or more a week. And you know that they have some savings they could use to ensure that no payments will be missed even on low-wage weeks. You can cosign for this person, say for a car loan to get them a car they can drive to that job, knowing that they aren't going to walk away and just stop making the payments. The loan issuer doesn't know any of that.  Or consider a young person with poor credit but good income who has recently decided to get smart about money, has written out a budget and a plan to rehabilitate their credit, and who you know will work passionately to make every payment and get the credit score up to a place where they can buy a house or whatever their goal is. Again, you can cosign for this person to make that happen, because you know something the lender doesn't. Or consider a middle aged person who's had some very hard knocks: laid off in a plant closing perhaps, marriage failure, lost all their house equity when the market collapsed, that sort of thing. They have a chance to start over again somewhere else and you have a chance to help. Again you know this isn't someone who is going to mismanage their money and walk away from the payments and leave you holding the bag. If you would give the person the money anyway (say, a car for your newly graduated child) then cosigning instead gives them more of a sense of accomplishment, since they paid for it, and gives them a great credit rating too. If you would not give the person the entire loan amount, but would make their payments for many months or even a year (say, your brother's mortgage for the house where he lives with a sick wife and 3 small children), then cosigning is only making official what you would have done anyway.  Arrange with the borrower that if they can't make their payments any more, you will backstop them AND the item (car, house, whatever) is going up for sale to cover your losses. If you don't think you could enforce that just from the strength of the relationship, reconsider co-signing. Then sign what you need to sign and step away from it. It's their loan, not yours. You want them to pay it and to manage it and to leave you out of it until it's all paid off and they thank you for your help. If things go south, you will have to pay, and it may take a while for you to sell the item or otherwise stop the paying, so you do need to be very confident that the borrower is going to make every single payment on time. My point is just that you can have that confidence, based on personal knowledge of character, employment situation, savings and other resources, in a way that a lender really cannot. Plus you already have money in a 529 plan that is meant for college expenses (and cannot be used to pay student loans) - use that money for what it's for. I disagree with @DStanley, as a current college student I would say to take out loans. Most of the time I am against loans though.  So WHY? There are very few times you will receive loans at 0% interest (for 4+ years). You have money saved currently, but you do not know what the future entails. If you expend all of your money on tuition and your car breaks down, what do you do? You can not used student loans to pay for your broken car.Student loans, as long as they are subsidized, serve as a wonderful risk buffer. You can pay off your loans with summer internships and retain the initial cash you had for additional activities that make college enjoyable, i.e - Fraternity/ Sorority, clubs, dinners, and social nights. Another benefit to taking these loans would assist in building credit, with an additional caveat being to get a credit card. In general, debt/loans/credit cards are non-beneficial. But, you have to establish debt to allow others to know that you can repay. Establishing this credit rating earlier than later is critical to cheaper interest rates on (say) a mortgage.  You have made it through, you have watched your expenses, and you can pay your debt. Finish It. If you do it right, you will not have loans when you graduate, you will have a stunning credit rating, and you will have enjoyed college to its fullest potential (remember, you only really go through it once.) But this is contingent on:  Good luck,  EDIT: I did not realize the implication of this penalty which made me edit the line above to include: (to the extent you can per year) For now, student loan repayment isn't considered a qualified educational expense. This means that if you withdraw from a 529 to pay your debts, you may be subject to income taxes and penalties.Source Furthermore,  Currently, taxpayers who use 529 plan money for anything other than qualified education expenses are subject to a 10% federal tax penalty. Source My advice with this new knowledge, save your 529 if you plan on continuing higher education at a more prestigious school. If you do not, use it later in your undergraduate years. "My thoughts on loaning money to friends or family are outlined pretty extensively here, but cosigning on a loan is a different matter.  It is almost never a good idea to do this (I say ""almost"" only because I dislike absolutes).  Here are the reasons why: Now, all that said, if my sister or parents were dying of cancer and cosigning a loan was the only way to cure them, I might consider cosigning on a loan with them, if that was the only option.  But, I would bet that 99.9% of such cases are not so dire, and your would-be co-borrower will survive with out the co-signing." You almost never want to repay a pre-2012 student loan early. As you've realised, you can put the money in an ISA instead and earn more interest than you're paying on the loan. If you withdrew money from the ISA each month to replace the repayments being taken from your salary, there'd be money left in the ISA when you finished repaying the loan. This is also the cheapest debt you'll ever have, so if you repay it now and then end up borrowing money elsewhere in the future, you'll probably be worse off. In particular, if you expect to have a mortgage at some point, you'll probably be better off keeping the money to add to a deposit rather than repaying it now and then borrowing more on the mortgage. You should also consider how long it'll take you to repay the loan normally. If you don't expect to finish repaying within 25 years, you'd be throwing money away by repaying early. This is more of an issue for the larger post-2012 loans. I'm a Finance major in Finland and here is how it would go here. As you loan money to the company, the company has no income, but gains an asset and a liability. When the company then uses the money to pay the bills it does have expenses that accumulate to the end of the accounting period where they have to be declared. These expenses are payed from the asset gained and has no effect to the liability. When the company then makes a profit it is taxable. How ever this taxable profit may be deducted from from a tax reserve accumulated over the last loss periods up to ten years. When the company then pays the loan back it is divided in principal and interest. The principal payment is a deduction in the company's liabilities and has no tax effect. The interest payment the again does have effect in taxes in the way of decreasing them. On your personal side giving loan has no effect. Getting the principal back has no effect. Getting interest for the loan is taxable income. When there are documents signifying the giving the loan and accounting it over the years, there should be no problem paying it back. I would advise against this, answering only the first part of question #1. Borrowing and lending money among friends and family members can often ruin relationships.  While it can sometimes be done successfully, this is most likely not the case.  All parties involved have to approach this uniquely in order for it to work.  This would include your son's future significant other.  Obviously you have done very well financially, congratulations.  Your view for your son might be for him to pay you off ASAP:   Even after becoming a doctor, continue to live like a student until the loan is paid off.   His view might be more conventional; get the car and house and pay off my loans before I am 50.  He may start with your view, but two years in he marries a woman that pressures him to be more conventional.   My advice would be to give if you can afford to, but if not, do not lend.  If you decide to lend then come up with a very clear agreement on the repayment schedule and consequences of non-payment.  You may want to see a lawyer. For the rest of it, interest payments received are taxable. The benefit of paying into a pension is that the payment is effectively made from pre-tax money. Either you pay from your own pocket and then you get income tax relief on the payment, i.e. your gross salary is reduced by the gross pension contribution and income tax is recalculated with the excess either refunded to you or put in your pension (the details are a bit more complicated depending on your marginal tax rate, but the end result is the same). Or your company pays, and then you are never charged tax on the payment in the first place. From the company's point of view, the two are roughly the same. Either it pays you who then pays into your pension, or it pays straight into your pension. Either way the money going out from the company is treated as a cost that is offset against the company's revenue, reducing the amount of corporation tax the company has to pay. There are some National Insurance advantages to paying directly into the pension; neither you nor the company gets relief on NI if the payment goes via you, but no NI is paid in the first place if it goes direct from the company. [EDIT: your question is actually worded to suggest that you want to lend your company money from your own pocket, and then have that loan directly discharged by the company paying into your pension. That's no different to you just paying into your pension directly, and wouldn't have any better tax implications. For the rest of my answer, I assume that the idea is actually to lend your company money that it uses to make an immediate contribution to your pension (as part of your pay from that company), and then the company will repay the loan later by returning the money to you personally. Your pension and you are two separate entities legally.] However, in your case, what you're proposing is that the company should effectively make a loss paying into your pension: it's going to end up with more costs than revenue. So, there won't be any immediate tax saving because there wasn't revenue to pay corporation tax on in the first place. You also won't save tax because the loan will be made from previously taxed income or whatever.  However, there will be a tax loss that can be carried forward and offset against future profits, so if you expect the company to make money in future to repay the loan, you might end up saving some corporation tax. You can also sometimes carry a tax loss back one year, so if your company had profits last year you could get some corporation tax back immediately. The repayment of the loan itself won't be subject to income tax as it's not income. So unless you can carry the loss back, you won't get any immediate tax relief by doing this, but it might give you a way to carry forward your annual allowance to future years, i.e. use it now and get the tax advantage later. However, the annual allowance can already be carried forward by up to three years, so this is only worthwhile if you expect that future revenue to repay the loan to arrive more than three years later. Also, this is only worthwhile if you'll continue to max out the annual allowance for paying into your pension in future years, otherwise you might as well just make the pension payment using that same revenue in future years. However, even if this beneficial tax-wise, I'm not sure if it's actually allowed; this might be viewed as an artificial transaction to avoid tax, and that could lead to HMRC disallowing the future tax relief. You might need to ask HMRC or an accountant about that. If you do make the loan, make sure it's clearly documented so you can show in future why the repayment shouldn't be treated as income.