Why not pay in full upfront for a car?
In general I'd say, yeah, if you can pay cash, pay cash. If you pay cash, then by definition you pay zero interest. If you get a loan, you'll pay interest. Most people get a loan to buy a car because they don't have the cash. Possible reasons not to pay cash when you could: One: Technically you can pay cash, but if you did, you would have little or no reserve for emergencies. Like if the car costs, say, $20,000.00, and you have $20,010.00 in your bank account, then technically you could afford to pay cash, but you probably shouldn't, because you don't want to have just $10 left. What if tomorrow something comes up? Two: Arguably, you have a place to invest money that pays more than the interest on the loan. Like say you can get a car loan for, whatever the going rate is today, say 6%. And you know a place to invest your money that is very safe and almost guaranteed to pay 10%. It would make sense to borrow to buy the car, invest the cash, and then withdraw money from the investment to make the payments on the car. You'd end up 4% ahead. There are a lot of catches to that strategy, though. The biggest is that the more the investment pays, the more likely that it is risky. If you thought the investment would pay 10% but it ends up paying only 4%, then you will lose money by this strategy. Also, there's the psychological element: Many people SAY and fully INTEND to invest their money, but then find other things they want to buy and so spend it instead. If you pay cash, you're committed. Possible (unlikely) reasons: But usually, yeah, if you can pay cash, you should. You need to do the maths exactly. The cost of buying a car in cash and using a loan is not the same. The dealership will often get paid a significant amount of money if you get a loan through them. On the other hand, they may have a hold over you if you need their loan (no cash, and the bank won't give you money).  One strategy is that while you discuss the price with the dealer, you indicate that you are going to get a loan through them. And then when you've got the best price for the car, that's when you tell them it's cash. Remember that the car dealer will do what's best for their finances without any consideration of what's good for you, so you are perfectly in your rights to do the same to them. Two adages come to mind. Never finance a depreciating asset. If you can't pay cash for a car, you can't afford it. If you decide you can finance at a low rate and invest at a higher one, you're leveraging your capital.  The risk here is that your investment drops in value, or your cash flow stops and you are unable to continue payments and have to sell the car, or surrender it. There are fewer risks if you buy the car outright.  There is one cost that is not considered though.  Opportunity cost.   Since you've declared transportation necessary, I'd say that opportunity cost is worth the lower risk, assuming you have enough cash left after buying a car to fund your emergency fund. Which brings me to my final point.  Be sure to buy a quality used car, not a new one.  Your emergency fund should be able to replace the car completely, in the case of a total loss where you are at fault and the loss is not covered by insurance. TLDR: My opinion is that it would be better to pay for a quality, efficient, basic transportation car up front than to take on a debt. There many car loans at zero percent interest.   Finance the car at zero percent, then take your money and invest it. If you want to be super safe buy a CD the same length as the car loan. 5 years you will get 2%.  If you still want safety and a better return take up a asset allocation strategy that moves your cash to risky assets when the market is performing well, then to cash, bonds, or cds when the market under-performs. Now you have your car with a zero percent loan and you are making the return on the money instead of the car company.
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? If you have enough money to buy a car in full, that probably means you have good credit. If you have good credit, car dealerships will often offer 0% loans for either a small period of time, like 12 months, or the entire loan. Taking a 0% loan is obviously more optimal than paying the entire lump sum up front. You can take the money and invest in other things that earn you more than 0%. However, most dealerships offer a rebate OR a 0% loan. Some commenters below claim that the rebate is usually larger than the saved interest, so definitely do the math if you have that option. "The question is about the dealer, right?  The dealer isn't providing this financing to you, Alfa is, and they're paying the dealer that same ""On the Road"" price when you finance the purchase.  So the dealer gets the same amount either way. The financing, through Alfa, means your payments go to Alfa.  And they're willing to give you 3,000 towards purchase of the car at the dealer in order to motivate those who can afford payments but not full cash for the car.  They end up selling more cars this way, keeping the factories busy and employees and stockholders happy along the way.  At least, that's how it's supposed to work out." If it was me, I would outsource as much as possible with the desire to receive up front payment from financing companies for originating a loan.  Why? The biggest risk to newer businesses is cash flow.  The amount of work a new business owner has to do is daunting.  If you can outsource some of that work it will increase your chance of success and make your life easier.  Focus on selling cars. The upfront origination will help with your cash flow. If you can outsource the credit decision making and paper work you have leveraged your time and can focus on more important things. Most of the people I know that own them are slightly older, and thus in their prime earning years, and many have paid off their homes. That can free up $1000 a month or more in monthly expenses, which would easily cover a nice luxury car payment.  If you've got it, and are into cars, why not? What's the point in having the biggest tombstone in the graveyard? "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." The optimal down payment is 0% IF your interest rate is also 0%. As the interest rate increases, so does the likelihood of the better option being to pay for the car outright. Note that this is probably a binary choice. In other words, depending on the rate you will pay, you should either put 0% down, or 100% down. The interesting question is what formula should you use to determine which way to go? Obviously if you can invest at a higher return than the rate you pay on the car, you would still want to put 0% down. The same goes for inflation, and you can add these two numbers together. For example, if you estimate 2% inflation plus 1% guaranteed investment, then as long as the rate on your car is less than 3%, you would want to minimize the amount you put down. The key here is you must actually invest it. Other possible reasons to minimize the down payment would be if you have other loans with higher rates- then obviously use that money to pay down those loans before the car loan. All that being said, some dealers will give you cash back if you pay for the car outright. If you have this option, do the math and see where it lands. Most likely taking the cash back is going to be more attractive so you don't even have to hedge inflation at all. Tip: Make sure to negotiate the price of the car before you tell them how you are going to pay for it. (And during this process you can hint that you'll pay cash for it.) "You are correct to be wary. Car dealerships make money selling cars, and use many tactics and advertisements to entice you to come into their showroom. ""We are in desperate need of [insert your make, model, year and color]! We have several people who want that exact car you have! Come in and sell it to us and buy a new car at a great price! We'll give you so much money on your trade in!"" In reality, they play a shell game and have you focus on your monthly payment. By extending the loan to 4 or 5 years (or longer), they can make your monthly payment lower, sure, but the total amount paid is much higher. You're right: it's not in your best interest. Buy a car and drive it into the ground. Being free of car payments is a luxury!" Not long after college in my new job I bought a used car with payments, I have never done that since. I just don't like having a car payment. I have bought every car since then with cash. You should never borrow money to buy a car There are several things that come into play when buying a car. When you are shopping with cash you tend to be more conservative with your purchases look at this Study on Credit card purchases.   A Dunn & Bradstreet study found that people spend 12-18% more when using credit cards than when using cash. And McDonald's found that the average transaction rose from $4.50 to $7.00 when customers used plastic instead of cash.  I would bet you if you had $27,000 dollars cash in your hand you wouldn't buy that car. You'd find a better deal, and or a cheaper car. When you finance it, it just doesn't seem to hurt as bad. Even though it's worse because now you are paying interest.  A new car is just insanity unless you have a high net worth, at least seven figures. Your $27,000 car in 5 years will be worth about $6500. That's like striking a match to $340 dollars a month, you can't afford to lose that much money. Pay Cash If you lose your job, get hurt, or any number of things that can cost you money or reduce your income, it's no problem with a paid for car. They don't repo paid for cars. You have so much more flexibility when you don't have payments. You mention you have 10k in cash, and a $2000 a month positive cash flow. I would find a deal on a 8000 - 9000 car I would not buy from a dealer*. Sell the car you have put that money with the positive cash flow and every other dime you can get at your student loans and any other debt you have, keep renting cheap keep the college lifestyle (broke) until you are completely out of debt. Then I would save for a house.  Finally I would read this Dave Ramsey book, if I would have read this at your age, I would literally be a millionaire by now, I'm 37. *Don't buy from a dealer Find a private sale car that you can get a deal on, pay less than Kelly Blue Book. Pay a little money $50 - 75 to have an automotive technician to check it out for you and get a car fax, to make sure there are no major problems. I have worked in the automotive industry for 20 + years and you rarely get a good deal from a dealer. “Everything popular is wrong.”         Oscar Wilde The .9% looks great, but it's not as relevant as the cost of the car itself. There are those who believe that one should never own a new car, that the first X years/miles of a car's life are the most expensive.  The real question is how your budget is allocated. Is the car payment a small sliver or a large slice? How big is the housing wedge? "In most cases of purchases the general advice is to save the money and   then make the purchase. Paying cash for a car is recommended over   paying credit for example. For a house, getting a mortgage is   recommended. Says who? These rules of thumb hide the actual equations behind them; they should be understood as heuristics, not as the word of god. The Basics The basic idea is, if you pay for something upfront, you pay some fixed cost, call it X, where as with a loan you need to pay interest payments on X, say %I, as well as at least fixed payments P at timeframe T, resulting in some long term payment IX. Your Assumption To some, this obviously means upfront payments are better than interest payments, as by the time the loan is paid off, you will have paid more than X. This is a good rule of thumb (like Newtonian's equations) at low X, high %I, and moderate T, because all of that serves to make the end result IX > X. Counter Examples Are there circumstances where the opposite is true? Here's a simple but contrived one: you don't pay the full timeframe. Suppose you die, declare bankruptcy, move to another country, or any other event that reduces T in such a way that XI is less than X. This actually is a big concern for older debtors or those who contract terminal illnesses, as you can't squeeze those payments out of the dead. This is basically manipulating the whole concept. Let's try a less contrived example: suppose you can get a return higher than %I. I can currently get a loan at around %3 due to good credit, but index funds in the long run tend to pay %4-%5. Taking a loan and investing it may pay off, and would be better than waiting to have the money, even in some less than ideal markets. This is basically manipulating T to deal with IX. Even less contrived and very real world, suppose you know your cash flow will increase soon; a promotion, an inheritance, a good market return. It may be better to take the loan now, enjoy whatever product you get until that cash flows in, then pay it all off at once; the enjoyment of the product will make the slight additional interest worth it. This isn't so much manipulating any part of the equation, it's just you have different goals than the loan. Home Loan Analysis For long term mortgages, X is high, usually higher than a few years pay; it would be a large burden to save that money for most people. %I is also typically fairly low; P is directly related to %I, and the bank can't afford to raise payments too much, or people will rent instead, meaning P needs to be affordable. This does not apply in very expensive areas, which is why cities are often mostly renters. T is also extremely long; usually mortgages are for 15 or 30 years, though 10 year options are available. Even with these shorter terms, it's basically the longest term loan a human will ever take. This long term means there is plenty of time for the market to have a fluctuation and raise the investments current price above the remainder of the loan and interest accrued, allowing you to sell at a profit. As well, consider the opportunity cost; while saving money for a home, you still need a place to live. This additional cost is comparable to mortgage payments, meaning X has a hidden constant; the cost of renting. Often X + R > IX, making taking a loan a better choice than saving up. Conclusion ""The general advice"" is a good heuristic for most common human payments; we have relatively long life spans compared to most common payments, and the opportunity cost of not having most goods is relatively low.  However, certain things have a high opportunity cost; if you can't talk to HR, you can't apply for jobs (phone), if you can't get to work, you can't eat (car), and if you have no where to live, it's hard to keep a job (house). For things with high opportunity costs, the interest payments are more than worth it." $27,000 for a car?!  Please, don't do that to yourself! That sounds like a new-car price.  If it is, you can kiss $4k-$5k of that price goodbye the moment you drive it off the lot.  You'll pay the worst part of the depreciation on that vehicle. You can get a 4-5 year old Corolla (or similar import) for less than half that price, and if you take care of it, you can get easily another 100k miles out of it. Check out Dave Ramsey's video.  (It's funny that the car payment he chooses as his example is the same one as yours: $475! ;) )  I don't buy his take on the 12% return on the stock market (which is fantasy in my book) but buying cars outright instead of borrowing or (gasp) leasing, and working your way up the food chain a bit with the bells/whistles/newness of your cars, is the way to go. In many (most?) cases, luxury cars are leased rather than purchased, so the payments on even an expensive car might not be as high as you'd expect. For simplicity, take a $100,000 car. If you were to buy that in cash or do a standard five-year auto loan, that would be incredibly expensive for all but the wealthiest of people. But a lease is different. When you lease a car, you are financing the car's depreciation over the lease term. So, let's suppose that you're signing up for a three-year lease. The car manufacturer will make an estimate of what that car will be worth when you bring it back in three years (this is called the residual value). If this number is $80,000, that means the lessee is only financing the $20,000 difference between the car's price and its residual value after three years - rather than the full $100,000 MSRP. At the end of the lease, he or she just turns the car back in. Luxury cars are actually especially amenable to leasing because they have excellent brand power - just because of the name on the hood, there are many people who would be happy to pay a lot for a three-year-old Mercedes or BMW. With a mid- or low-range car, the brand is not as powerful and used cars consequentially have a lower residual value (as a percentage of the MSRP) than luxury cars. So, don't look at an $80,000 luxury car and assume that the owner has paying for the entire $80,000. "I don't think you're missing anything on the math side as far as the payments.  Likewise, it may seem everyone's driving a nicer car, but I'm going to predict that's based on area and a few other factors (for instance, my used car feels like riches in a college town).  The behavior of why people would pay money, especially with high interest debt, for something is a little different. To explain the behavior behind people who purchase luxury cars: for some people, a car is a purchase that they value, similar to a person valuing the clothes they wear, the house they live in, or the equipment they buy and either borrowing or paying full price on an expensive car is worth it to them.  We can call it a status symbol dismissively and criticize the financial waste without realizing, ""Wait, this is something they value"" like a rare book collector likes rare books (would a rare book collector pass on borrowing money if it meant a once-in-a-lifetime rare book purchase opportunity?). Have you ever felt, ""Wow this is cool/awesome/amazing"" with something?  Basically, that's how many of them feel toward these cars.  As much as I'd love to say they're only doing it for status (because I'm not a car person), that's actually somewhat de-humanizing and the more I've met people like this, the more I've realized this is their ""thing"" and to them it's totally worth it (even with all the debt).  I have no doubt that there's a percentage of them who truly may be misled - maybe they don't realize the full cost of borrowing money or leasing.  Still, for those who don't care the full cost, that's because it's their thing.  We can all agree that it's still not wise to do financially (borrow on a luxury vehicle), and it won't change that some people will do it." "In regards to purchasing full coverage on your car even if you can afford to replace it, consider the hassle you have to deal with an accident that is not just the cost.  As an example, my sister's car was stolen and wrecked.  It was her problem to go recover the car on the other side of the state such that she would not be paying the storage ""fees"" imposed by the sheriff of the other county.  Had she had insurance they would have taken care of it call. Another story is that I rented a car and side swiped in the parking lot by a hit and run.  I was responsible for the minor damage.  I started down the path of paying out of pocket because it was small enough that I did not want to submit a claim.  The rental car agency started to pile on extra fees such that it was worth it to turn in a claim.  My insurance company was savvy enough to be able to dispute the extra charges.  After I submitted it to the insurance company I basically did nothing.  They took care of everything. So, in summary, when you buy full coverage on your car, it is not just a financial decision.  It is also about not having to deal with a hassle."