Value of credit score if you never plan to borrow again?
"In the United States, the Fair Credit Reporting Act allows companies to buy your credit information for ""legitimate business needs."" The legitimate use of credit scores and credit reporting varies state to state, but like it or not, you can expect a lot more non-lending use of your credit information in the future. Companies and individuals use credit reports as an assessment of general behavior because, unfortunately, they work. You've seen the disclaimers about ""past performance…"", but unfortunately in this case… past performance really has been shown to be a pretty reliable indicator of future behavior. So…" "what are the incentives to that person to actually pay off his/her debt as opposed to just walking away from it and relying on the cash (s)he has for the future spending needs as opposed to borrowing Well, you can't just ""walk away"" from debt - you still owe it. Eventually your creditors would end up suing you in court for the money, plus interest owed.  I suppose you could try to continually duck the authorities, but you'd still owe the money legally." If you're wealthy why do you think they wouldn't sue you for the money you owed?? And, as sunk818 says, credit scores can influence insurance costs.  While you could self-insure your home you generally can't self-insure when it comes to liability coverage on a car. Only reason I can think of is that having a credit card, or several, is handy for buying stuff on-line, or not having to haul around a fat wallet full of cash.    Of course for some of us, getting the cash back and 0% interest periods are nice, too, even if we don't really need the money.  Same as for instance trying to get good mpg when you're driving, even if you could easily afford to fill up a Hummer.  It's a game, really. According to Money Girl, home insurance premiums are higher if you have a poor credit score. You might self-insure though if you are wealthy. "There's many concrete answers, but there's something circular about your question. The only thing I can think of is that phone service providers ask for credit report when you want to start a new account but I am sure that could be worked around if you just put down a cash deposit in some cases. So now the situation is flipped - you are relying on your phone company's credit!  Who is to say they don't just walk away from their end of the deal now that you have paid in full?   The amount of credit in this situation is conserved. You just have to eat the risk and rely on their credit, because you have no credit. It doesn't matter how much money you have - $10 or $10000 can be extorted out of you equally well if you must always pay for future goods up front. You also can't use that money month-by-month now, even in low-risk investments. Although, they will do exactly that and keep the interest. And I challenge your assumption that you will never default. You are not a seraphic being. You live on planet earth. Ever had to pay $125,000 for a chemo treatment because you got a rare form of cancer? Well, you won't be able to default on your phone plan and pay for your drug (or food, if you bankrupt yourself on the drug) because your money is already gone. I know you asked a simpler question but I can't write a good answer without pointing out that ""no default"" is a bad model, it's like doing math without a zero element. By the way, this is realistic. It applies to renting in, say, New York City. It's better to be a tenant with credit who can withhold rent in issue of neglected maintenance or gross unfair treatment, than a tenant who has already paid full rent and has left the landlord with little market incentive to do their part." "You're definitely not the first to pose this question.  During the peak of the housing crisis I noticed a decent amount of very high dollar properties get abandoned to their fates.  Individuals who can afford the mortgage on a 5 million dollar home don't necessarily need their credit to survive so it made more sense to let the asset (now a liability) go and take the hit on their credit for a few years. Unsecured debt, as mentioned is a little trickier because its backed by default by your personal estate.  If the creditor is active they will sue you and likely win unless there are issues with their paperwork.   Thing is though, you might escape some impacts of the debt to your credit rating and you might not ""need"" credit, but if you were to act as a wealthy person and not ""new money"" you would observe the significant value of using credit. credit allows you to leverage your wealth and expand the capacity of your money to import your overall wealth picture.  It may prove best to learn that and then make more wealth on your winnings than take the short sighted approach and welch on the debt."
I have recently been the lender to a couple people. It was substantially less money (~$3k), but I was trusting their good faith to pay me back. As a lender, I will never do it again. Reasons, Overall, not worth it. "The conclusion that ""it's bad to have 0% utilization"" from the data you linked is misleading.  When people have zero history, they also have zero utilization.  The fact that generally people with zero utilization are credit virgins is what drives that average score.  Obviously, people with zero, or limited, history will have significantly lower credit scores than folks with some utilization and a lot of history. In response to the couple comments regarding the dip on attaining 0% utilization.  The data shows a 67 point drop in average score from 0% to 1%-10%.  The stark deviation in average score between those two groups is not the result of a couple point change because of zero utilization." Well, it is a negative point of view, but nobody in the history of money has ever loaned money because they like you.  I suppose you could paint it as an honest point of view. All money lending is for profit.  If you have a high score, you are very likely to repay your loan because you are lower risk.  We always hear lower risk... but the risk is that they won't make money off of you. I think that just like we buy previously owned vehicles cars instead of used cars, and we banks call them service fees instead of junk fees, our credit score discusses our credit worthiness instead of profitability But none of that means you can't benefit from it.  It isn't a fear tactic, it is a way to judge each other.  You probably pay interest and fees to keep it high, but that is price of lending. I think the questioner has a negative view of credit (which I suppose is fine and is their right, I will defend their right to an opinion) but the way we do and judge credit is neither evil or benevolent. I could certainly agree that more transparency would be good, but only for honest folks.  If the credit bureaus made it public how they judged us, there would be a new industry for people who want to game the system. Update Since it always will cost to use credit, and using credit is the only way to prove your a low credit risk, it will therefore always cost money to raise your credit score. However the return on investment is exemplified in this question:  a person with no credit was able to get a loan, but at serious out of pocket cost.  Later, after establishing credit at a price of real money, he was able to secure a nearly identical loan for considerably less cost (in terms of interest paid) because he had proven himself worthy.  When I say proven, I mean paid interest. There is nothing wrong with questioning the system, change only occurs when people question the status quo.  And for sure our current system is not perfect, but like many employed systems while it is terrible but there is nothing better. Has this already occurred, if not: why? What are the road blocks? I think it's just that the barriers to entry are rather high.  Lenders would potentially be interested in a new score if it demonstrably saved them money (by more effectively weeding out risky borrowers), but because the FICO score already exists and they already know how to use it, there are costs and risks in making the transition, so lenders are unlikely to switch without solid evidence.  But to get solid evidence, you would need to test out the new score and see how well it correlated with loan default and so forth.  So there is a catch-22: no one will use the score until they know it works, but you can't know whether it works until people start using it. The existence of non-FICO credit scores (like VantageScore) shows that it is possible for alternatives to crop up.  The question is just whether they have enough concrete advantages to overcome the track record and name recognition of FICO.  Only time will tell. As for why an alternative score wouldn't be open source, you could ask the same about almost anything.  Creating a measurably better score would likely take lots of time and money (to gather and analyze data both on characteristics of borrowers and on their record of debt payment).  If someone is able to do that, they would probably rather do it secretly and then milk it for billions by selling the results of the secret for a long time without selling the secret itself, as FICO has done. How bad would maxing out my credit card once a year affect my score is a related discussion. You shouldn't be using 20%, but rather keep the monthly statement below 20%. If the credit lines add to $5000, charging gas and paying in full each month will help your score (obviously, I assume you don't pay more than $1000/mo for gas). Letting the balance go unpaid month to month means you are paying interest. Probably 18% or more. This is bad. The whole point of a credit report and, by extension, a credit score, is to demonstrate (and judge) your ability to repay borrowed funds.  Everything stems from that goal; available credit, payment history, collections, etc all serve to demonstrate whether or not you personally are a good investment for lenders to pursue. Revolving credit balances are tricky because they are more complicated than fixed loans (for the rest of this answer, I'll just talk about credit cards, though it also applies to lines of credit such as overdraft protection for checking accounts, HELOCs, and other such products). Having a large available balance relative to your income means that at any time you could suddenly drown yourself in debt.  Having no credit cards means you don't have experience managing them (and personal finances are governed largely by behavior, meaning experience is invaluable).  Having credit cards but carrying a high balance means you know how to borrow money, but not pay it back.  Having credit cards but carrying no balance means you don't know how to borrow money (or you don't trust yourself to pay it back). Ideally, lenders will see a pattern of you borrowing a portion of the available credit, and then paying it down.  Generally that means utilizing up to 30% of your available credit.  Even if you maintain the balance in that range without paying it off completely, it at least shows that you have restraint, and are able to stop spending at a limit you personally set, rather than the limit the bank sets for you. So, to answer your question, 0% balance on your credit cards is bad because you might as well not have them.  Use it, pay it off, rinse and repeat, and it will demonstrate your ability to exercise self control as well as your ability to repay your debts. "Read the terms carefully.  With promotional offers, if you do anything ""bad"", the promotion is terminated and you immediately revert to either your normal rate or a penalty rate. ""Bad"" includes things like: making a late payment, going over your limit, paying less than the minimum payment, etc. I wouldn't sweat the potential credit score impacts. These promotions are pretty much the best deals that you can get for an unsecured loan." "Your use of the term ""loan"" is confusing, what you're proposing is to open a new card and take advantage of the 0% APR by carrying a balance.  The effects to your credit history / score will be the following:" You don't need a credit score. After I paid off my house mortgage many years ago I had this discussion with my mortgage agent (now bank VP). Your credit score is not a measure your ability to repay. It is a behavioral model and a statistical measure of the likelihood that the banks will make money off of you when they give you a loan, and a marketing tool that the banking industry uses to sell you long term and short term debt (mortgages and credit cards). Statistically speaking, people who close out major loans change their behaviors, and the model captures this change in behavior. In my own case, even though I have a credit history and sufficient cash is the bank to buy my next home outright, I have no credit score . What the model says is that people with my behavioral profile are not likely to take a loan, and if they did take one, they would pay it back so quickly that the bank would not even recoup the cost of initiating the loan. In short, people with my profile are bad news for the loans side of the bank. Thanks @quid for suggesting I capture this and post it as an answer If I use my credit card on my ITIN and behave like a good guy (paying   everything on time), will it create history for my SSN next year or   will I have to start from scratch? Yes, you'll keep your history, it will be reported on your SSN when you update your creditors with it. I have an option of using a secured card v/s an unsecured one. Which   one is better from the view of my credit history? The one which you don't have to pay for. Consider the value of money you're using for the secured card, and all the fees and interest you expect to pay. Unless you're planning on a mortgage in the next couple of years, there's no rush with the credit. It is definitely not worth paying money for. I have heard that it is better for your credit score to pay them down over time. Will it make much of a difference? I have never heard that, however, the financial institutions (who are charging you an amount of interest which was at one time in the not so distant past classified and punishable in state criminal codes) really enjoy you thinking that way. You are clearly capable of doing the math yourself. While I don't know the exact numbers, I am totally confident that you will find in about 5 or 10 minutes (if that long) that eliminating debt of any kind in your life will pay an immediate return that beats the great majority of other investments in terms of risk/reward. After the immediate financial return, there is a quieter, subtler, and even greater long term benefit. Basic principle: Highest Rates First Perhaps this decision could be considered slightly less important than deciding not to smoke during your youth; but I would put it as a close second. You are already in a position where you can see the damage that your prior decisions (about financial debt) have produced. Run the clock back to the time in your life when you were debt free. Now, pay off that debt with the big check, and start from zero. Now, turn on your psychic powers and predict the same amount of time, in the future, with the same amount of money (don't even try to adjust for inflation; just use flat dollars) WITHOUT losing the money which you have given to the financial institutions during this previous part of your life. Do you now see why the financial institutions want you to think about slowly paying them off instead of waking up tomorrow without owing them anything ? "The worth of a credit score (CS) is variable.  If you buy your stuff outright with 100% down then your CS is worthless. If you take a loan to buy stuff then it is worth exactly what you save in interest versus a poor score. But there is also the ""access"" benefit of CS where loans will no longer be available to you, forcing you to rent. If you consider rent as money down teh tiolet then this could factor in. The formula for CS worth is different for everyone. Bill Gates CS is worth zero to him. Walking away from a mortage is not the same as walking away from a loan.  A mortage has collateral. There are 2 objects: the money, and the house. If you walk away the bank gets the house as a fair trade. They keep all money you put against the house to boot! Sometimes the bank PROFITS when you walk away.  So in a good market you could consider walking away to be the Moral Michael thing to do. :)" Hi guys, have a question from my uni finance course but I’m unsure how to treat the initial loan (as a bond, or a bill or other, and what the face value of the loan is).  I’ll post the question below, any help is appreciated.  “Hi guys, I have a difficult university finance question that’s really been stressing me out....  “The amount borrowed is $300 million and the term of the debt credit facility is six years from today  The facility requires minimum loan repayments of $9 million in each financial year except for the first year.  The nominal rate for this form of debt is 5%. This intestest rate is compounded monthly and is fixed from the date the facility was initiated.  Assume that a debt repayment of $10 million is payed on 31 August 2018 and $9million on April 30 2019. Following on monthly repayments of $9 million at the end of each month from May 31 2019 to June 30 2021.  Given this information determine the outstanding value of the debt credit facility on the maturity date.”  Can anyone help me out with the answer? I’ve been wracking my brain trying to decide if I treat it as a bond or a bill.”  Thanks in advance, "I have never had a credit card and have been able to function perfectly well without one for 30 years. I borrowed money twice, once for a school loan that was countersigned, and once for my mortgage. In both cases my application was accepted. You only need to have ""good credit"" if you want to borrow money. Credit scores are usually only relevant for people with irregular income or a past history of delinquency. Assuming the debtor has no history of delinquency, the only thing the bank really cares about is the income level of the applicant. In the old days it could be difficult to rent a car without a credit car and this was the only major problem for me before about 2010. Usually I would have to make a cash deposit of $400 or something like that before a rental agency would rent me a car. This is no longer a problem and I never get asked for a deposit anymore to rent cars. Other than car rentals, I never had a problem not having a credit card." Your credit rating will rise once the loan is repaid or paid regularly (in time). It will not get back to normal instantly. If the property is dead weight you may want to sell it so your credit score will increase in the medium term.