How to compute for losses in an upside down trade-in of a financed car?
"Numbers: Estimate you still owe around 37000 (48500 - 4750, 5% interest, 618 per month payment). Initial price, down payment, payments made - none of these mean anything.  Ask your lender, ""What is the payoff of the current loan?"" Next, sell or trade the current vehicle. Compare to the amount owed. Any shortfall has to be repaid, out of pocket, or in some cases added to the price of the new car and included in the principal of the new loan.  You cannot calculate how much you still owe the way you have, because it totally ignores interest. Advice on practicality:  Don't do this.  You will be upside down even worse on the new car from the instant you drive off the lot.  Sell the current vehicle, find a way to pay the difference - one that doesn't involve financing. Cut your losses on the upside down vehicle. Then purchase a new vehicle. I'm in the ""Pay cash for gently used"" school, YMMV. Another option is to go to your bank.  Refinance your car now to get a lower interest rate.  Pay as much of the principal as you can.  Keep that car until it is paid off.  Then you will not be upside down. If you're asking how to use the estimator on the webpage.  Put the payoff in the downpayment as a negative and the trade in value in the trade in spot.  Expect the payment to go up significantly.   Another opinion that might be practical advice.  Nothing we say here will convince your financially responsible spouse that this is a good idea." I think you are making this more complicated that it has to be.  In the end you will end up with a car that you paid X, and is worth Y. Your numbers are a bit hard to follow.  Hopefully I got this right. I am no accountant, this is how I would figure the deal: The payments made are irrelevant.  The downpayment is irrelevant as it is still a reduction in net worth.   Your current car has a asset value of <29,500>.  That should make anyone pause a bit.   In order to get into this new car you will have to finance the shortfall on the current car (29,500), the price of the vehicle (45,300), the immediate depreciation (say 7,000).  In the end you will have a car worth 38K and owe 82K.  So you will have a asset value of <44,000>.  Obviously a much worse situation.  To do this car deal it would cost the person 14,500 of net worth the day the deal was done.  As time marched on, it would be more as the reduction in debt is unlikely to keep up with the depreciation. Additionally the new car purchase screen shows a payment of $609/month if you bought the car with zero down.  Except you don't have zero down, you have -29,500 down.  Making the car payment higher, I estamate 1005/month with 3.5%@84 months.  So rather than having a hit to your cash flow of $567 for 69 more months, you would have a payment of about $1000 for 84 months if you could obtain the interest rate of 3.5%. Those are the two things I would focus on is the reduction in net worth and the cash flow liability.   I understand you are trying to get a feel for things, but there are two things that make this very unrealistic.  The first is financing.  It is unlikely that financing could be obtained with this deal and if it could this would be considered a sub-prime loan.  However, perhaps a relative could finance the deal. Secondly, there is no way even a moderately financially responsible spouse would approve this deal.  That is provided there were not sigificant assets, like a few million. If that is the case why not just write a check? "I'm going to ignore your numbers to avoid spending the time to understand them.  I'm just going to go over the basic moving parts of trading an upside down car against another financed car because I think you're conflating price and value.  I'm also going to ignore taxes, and fees, and depreciation. The car has an acquisition cost (price) then it has a value.  You pay the price to obtain this thing, then in the future it is worth what someone else will pay you. When you finance a car you agree to your $10,000 price, then you call up Mr. Bank and agree to pay 10% per year for 5 years on that $10,000.  Mr. Banker wires over $10,000 and you drive home in your car.   Say in a year you want a different car.  This new car has a price of $20,000, and wouldn't you know it they'll even buy your current car from you.  They'll give you $7,000 to trade in your current car. Your current car has a value of $7,000.  You've made 12 payments of $188.71.  Of those payments about $460 was interest, you now owe about $8,195 to Mr. Banker. The new dealership needs to send payment to Mr. Banker to get the title for your current car.  They'll send the $7,000 they agreed to pay for your car.  Then they'll loan you the additional $1,195 ($8,195 owed on the car minus $7,000 trade in value).   Your loan on the new car will be for $21,195, $20,000 for the new car and $1,195 for the amount you still owed on the old car after the dealership paid you $7,000 for your old car. It doesn't matter what your down-payment was on the old car, it doesn't matter what your payment was before, it doesn't matter what you bought your old car for.  All that matters is how much you owe on it today and how much the buyer (the dealership) is willing to pay you for it. How much of this is ""loss"" is an extremely vague number to derive primarily because your utility of the car has a value.  But it could be argued that the $1,195 added on to your new car loan to pay for the old car is lost."
That's tricky, actually. First, as the section 1015 that you've referred to in your other question says - you take the lowest of the fair market value or the actual donor basis. Why is it important? Consider these examples: So, if the relative bought you a brand new car and you're the first title holder (i.e.: the relative paid, but the car was registered directly to you) - you can argue that the basis is the actual money paid. In essence you got a money gift that you used to purchase the car. If however the relative bought the car, took the title, and then drove it 5 miles to your house and signed the title over to you - the IRS can argue that the car basis is the FMV, which is lower because it is now a used car that you got. You're the second owner. That may be a significant difference, just by driving off the lot, the car can lose 10-15% of its value. If you got a car that's used, and the donor gives it to you - your basis is the fair market value (unless its higher than the donor's basis - in which case you get the donor's basis). You always get the lowest basis for losses (and depreciation is akin to a loss). Now consider the situation when your relative is a business owner and used the car for business. He didn't take the depreciation, but he was entitled to. IRS can argue that the fact that he didn't take is irrelevant and reduce the donor's basis by the allowable depreciation. That may bring your loss basis to below the FMV. I suggest you take it to a tax professional licensed in your state who will check all the facts and circumstances of your situation. Your relative might be slapped with a gift tax as well, if the car FMV is above certain amount (currently the exemption is $14000). A loan that does not begin with **at least a 20% deposit** and run through a term of **no longer than 48 months** is the world's way of telling you that *you can't afford this vehicle*.  Consumer-driven cars are rapidly depreciating assets. Attenuating the loan to 70 months or longer means that payments will not keep up with normal depreciation, thus trapping the buyer in an upside down loan for the entire term. Trade-in values are generally below what you can get in a private sale. To directly answer your question, you should sell the crossover yourself and use the balance to purchase your new vehicle. I would encourage you to use the $9k to finance directly without a lease, especially if you are planning on financing after the lease term. The lease will not save you money over the time you drive the vehicle in this case, and worse, will likely expose you to risk of having to pay additional fees if you break certain terms in the lease (mileage, wear and tear, etc) Best option mathematically is to use the $9k to purchase a vehicle for cash. This provides the lowest total cost of ownership.  Even if you are afraid of purchasing a lemon, leasing a vehicle is awfully expensive insurance against that possibility. You would have to rack up some significant repairs to justify the cost of the lease vs cash over the term of operating the vehicle. "—they will pull your credit report and perform a ""hard inquiry"" on your file. This means the inquiry will be noted in your credit report and count against you, slightly. This is perfectly normal. Just don't apply too many times too soon or it can begin to add up. They will want proof of your income by asking for recent pay stubs. With this information, your income and your credit profile, they will determine the maximum amount of credit they will lend you and at what interest rate. The better your credit profile, the more money they can lend and the lower the rate.  —that you want financed (the price of the car minus your down payment) that is the amount you can apply for and in that case the only factors they will determine are 1) whether or not you will be approved and 2) at what interest rate you will be approved. While interest rates generally follow the direction of the prime rate as dictated by the federal reserve, there are market fluctuations and variances from one lending institution to the next. Further, different institutions will have different criteria in terms of the amount of credit they deem you worthy of.  —you know the price of the car. Now determine how much you want to put down and take the difference to a bank or credit union. Or, work directly with the dealer. Dealers often give special deals if you finance through them. A common scenario is: 1) A person goes to the car dealer 2) test drives 3) negotiates the purchase price 4) the salesman works the numbers to determine your monthly payment through their own bank. Pay attention during that last process. This is also where they can gain leverage in the deal and make money through the interest rate by offering longer loan terms to maximize their returns on your loan. It's not necessarily a bad thing, it's just how they have to make their money in the deal. It's good to know so you can form your own analysis of the deal and make sure they don't completely bankrupt you.  —is that you can comfortable afford your monthly payment. The car dealers don't really know how much you can afford. They will try to determine to the best they can but only you really know. Don't take more than you can afford. be conservative about it. For example: Think you can only afford $300 a month? Budget it even lower and make yourself only afford $225 a month." "One part of the equation that I don't think you are considering is the loss in value of the car.  What will this 30K car be worth in 84 months or even 60 months?  This is dependent upon condition, but probably in the neighborhood of $8 to $10K.   If one is comfortable with that level of financial loss, I doubt they are concerned with the investment value of 27K over the loan of 30K @.9%. I also think it sets a bad precedent.  Many, and I used to be among them, consider a car payment a necessary evil.  Once you have one, it is a difficult habit to break.  Psychologically you feel richer when you drive a paid for car.  Will that advantage of positive thinking lead to higher earnings?  Its possible. The old testament book of proverbs gives many sound words of advice.  And you probably know this but it says:  ""...the borrower is slave to the lender"".  In my own experience, I feel there is a transformation that is beyond physical to being debt free." At minimum, put down the sale price less what insurance would pay if you got in an accident when driving home, OR purchase gap insurance. This auto loan calculator is fun to play around with.  The larger the down payment, the smaller your monthly payments will be.  Don't forget to budget insurance and gas!  Insurance on a car you make payments on is more expensive. http://www.bankrate.com/calculators/auto/auto-loan-calculator.aspx A buddy of mine had a string of bad luck and totaled his car a few months after the date of purchase.  He learned what it meant to be 'underwater', insurance paid him a few thousand less than the value of his loan.  What's worse than having no car, having no car and a loan! Absolutely do not pay off the car if you aren't planning to keep it.  The amount of equity that you have from a trade in vehicle will always be a variable when negotiating a new car purchase.  By applying cash (a hard asset) to increase your equity, you are trading a fixed amount for an unknown, variable amount.  You are also moving from a position of more certainty for a position of less certainty.  You gain nothing by paying off the car, whereas the dealer can negotiate away a larger piece of the equity in the vehicle. There are several factors here. Firstly, there's opportunity cost, i.e. what you would get with the money elsewhere. If you have higher interest opportunities (investing, paying down debt) elsewhere, you could be paying that down instead. There's also domino effects: by reducing your liquid savings to or below the minimum, you can't move any of it into tax advantaged retirement accounts earning higher interest. Then there's the insurance costs. You are required to buy extra insurance to protect your lender. You should factor in the extra insurance you would buy vs the insurance required. Given that you can buy the car yourself, catastrophic insurance may not be necessary, or you may prefer a higher deductible than your lender will allow. If you're not sufficiently capitalized, you may need gap insurance to cover when your car depreciates faster than your loan is paid down. A 30 percent payment should be enough to not need it though. Finally, there's some value in having options. If you have the loan and the cash, you can likely pay it off without penalty. But it will be harder to get the loan if you don't finance it. Maybe you can take out a loan against the car later, but I haven't looked into the fees that might incur.  If it's any help, I'm in the last stretch of a 3 year car loan. At the time paying in cash wasn't an option, and having done it I recognize that it's more complicated than it seems. New tires will increase the resale value of the car; while not by the full cost of the tires, it will not be entirely a sunk cost. You'd need to factor that in and find out how much the new tires increase the resale value of the car to determine how much they would truly cost you.  However, I suspect they would cost you less than a $25,000 car a year early would.  That new car would cost some amount over time - it sounds like you buy a new car every 8 years or so? So it would cost you $25/8 = $3.3k/year.  That would, then, be the overall cost of the new car a year early - $3.3k (as it would mean one less year out of your old car, so assuming it was also $25k/8 year or similar, that year becomes lost and thus a cost). "Yikes! Not always is this the case... For example, you purchased a new car with an interest rate of 5-6%or even higher... Why pay that much interest throughout the loan. Sometimes trading in the vehicle at a lower rate will get you a lower or sometimes the same payment even with an upgraded (newer/safer technology) design. The trade off? When going from New to New, the car may depreciate faster than what you would save from the interest savings on a new loan. Sometimes the tactics used to get you back to the dealership could be a little harsh, but if you do your research long before you inquire, you may come out on the winning end. Look at what you're paying in interest and consider it a ""re-finance"" of your car but taking advantage of the manufacturer's low apr special to off-set the costs." The car deal makes money 3 ways. If you pay in one lump payment. If the payment is greater than what they paid for the car, plus their expenses, they make a profit. They loan you the money. You make payments over months or years, if the total amount you pay is greater than what they paid for the car, plus their expenses, plus their finance expenses they make money. Of course the money takes years to come in, or they sell your loan to another business to get the money faster but in a smaller amount. You trade in a car and they sell it at a profit. Of course that new transaction could be a lump sum or a loan on the used car... They or course make money if you bring the car back for maintenance, or you buy lots of expensive dealer options. Some dealers wave two deals in front of you: get a 0% interest loan. These tend to be shorter 12 months vs 36,48,60 or even 72 months. The shorter length makes it harder for many to afford. If you can't swing the 12 large payments they offer you at x% loan for y years that keeps the payments in your budget. pay cash and get a rebate. If you take the rebate you can't get the 0% loan. If you take the 0% loan you can't get the rebate. The price you negotiate minus the rebate is enough to make a profit. The key is not letting them know which offer you are interested in. Don't even mention a trade in until the price of the new car has been finalized. Otherwise they will adjust the price, rebate, interest rate, length of loan,  and trade-in value to maximize their profit. The suggestion of running the numbers through a spreadsheet is a good one. If you get a loan for 2% from your bank/credit union for 3 years and the rebate from the dealer, it will cost less in total than the 0% loan from the dealer. The key is to get the loan approved by the bank/credit union before meeting with the dealer. The money from the bank looks like cash to the dealer. I have found a good explanation here: http://www.contracts-for-difference.com/Financing-charge.html Financing is calculated by taking the overall position size, and multiplying it by (LIBOR + say 2%) and then dividing by 365 x the amount of days the position is open. For instance, the interest rate applicable for overnight long positions may be 6% or 0.06. To calculate how much it would cost you to hold a long position for X number of days you would need to make this 'pro rata' meaning that you would need to divide the 0.06 by 365 and multiply it by X days and then multiply this by the trade size. So for example, for a trade size of $20,000, held for 30 days, the interest cost would be about $98.6. It is important to note that due to financing, long positions held for extended periods can reduce returns. "A while back I sold cars for a living.  Over the course of 4 years I worked for 3 different dealerships.  I sold new cars at 2 and used at the last one. When selling new cars I found that the majority of people buying the higher end cars honestly shouldn't have been - 80%+.  They almost always came in owing more on their trades then they were worth, put down very little cash and were close to being financially strapped.   From a financial perspective these deals were hard to close, not because the buyer was picky but rather because their finances were a mess.  Fully half, and probably more, we had to switch from the car they initially wanted down to a much cheaper version or try to convert to a lease because it was the only way the bank would loan the money.  We called them ""$30,000 millionaires"" because they didn't make a whole lot but tried to look like they did.  As a salesman you knew you were in serious trouble when they didn't even try to negotiate. Around 2% of the deals I did were actual cash deals - meaning honest cash, not those who came in with a pre-approved loan from a bank.  These were invariably for used cars about 3 to 4 years old and they never had a trade in.  The people doing this always looked comfortable but never dressed up, you wouldn't even look at them twice.  The negotiations were hard because they knew exactly how much that car should go for and wouldn't even pay that.   It was obvious they knew the value of money. That said, I've been in the top 3% of wage earners for about 20 years and at no point have I considered myself in a position to ""afford"" a new ""luxury"" car.  IMHO, there are far more important things you can do with that kind of money." "When your dream car is not just 200 times your disposable income but in fact 200 times your whole monthly salary, then there is no way for you to afford it right now. Any attempt to finance through a loan would put you into a debt trap you won't ever dig yourself out.  And if there are any car dealerships in your country which claim otherwise, run away fast. Jon Oliver from Last Week tonight made a video about business practices of car dealerships in the United States which sell cars on loans to people who can't afford them a while ago. As usual: When a deal seems too good to be true, it generally isn't true at all. After a few months, the victims customers usually end up with no car but lots of outstanding debt they pay off for years. So how do you tell if you can afford a car or not? A new car usually lives for about 10-20 years. So when you want to calculate the monthly cost of owning a new car, divide the price by 120. But that's just the price for buying the vehicle, not for actually driving it. Cars cost additional money each month for gas, repairs, insurance, taxes etc. (these costs depend a lot on your usage pattern and location, so I can not provide you with any numbers for that). If you have less disposable income per month (as in ""money you currently have left at the end of each month"") than monthly cost of purchase plus expected monthly running costs, you can not afford the car. Possible alternatives:" "Pay it off. If necessary, get a loan so you can pay it off; that's what refinancing is all about and your favorite bank or credit union would be happy to help you with this. If that isn't sufficient to make the car affordable you may need to sell it, take the loss, and learn from the experience. Sorry, but you made an agreement and it's up to you to find a way to meet your end of the bargain. (If you had decided you didn't like this loan within a few days of signing, you might have been able to back out under ""cooling off period"" laws. But those only allow a very limited time for reconsideration.)"