Is a 50-Year Mortgage Really That Much Crazier Than a 30-Year One?

Article

Last week, President Trump sparked a heated debate by suggesting the U.S. should back a 50-year fixed-rate mortgage, stirring both intrigue and alarm. Critics argue it locks people into debt for decades. Supporters say it makes monthly payments more manageable. But what do economists actually think?

Why People Like the Idea

One of the biggest appeals of a 50-year mortgage is lower monthly payments. By stretching out the repayment period, borrowers can reduce what they pay each month, offering breathing room for more cash-strapped homebuyers.

Fixed-rate mortgages — whether 30 or 50 years — give homeowners predictability. Your payment stays the same even if inflation or interest rates rise, which economists say provides a strong shield against cost spikes.

The Big Trade-Offs

1. Much More Interest Over Time
The longer you borrow, the more interest you pay. Experts estimate that on a $400,000 home, a 50-year mortgage could tack on hundreds of thousands of extra dollars in interest compared to a 30-year loan.

2. Slow Equity Growth
In a 50-year mortgage, the early years — potentially a decade or more — are dominated by interest payments. That means homeowners build equity very slowly. If home prices drop, borrowers could easily find themselves “underwater” (owing more than the home is worth).

3. Risk of Long-Term Commitment
If someone stays in the home for a long time, they might be making payments well into retirement. If they need to sell earlier, they may not have built much net value.

4. Not a Real Fix for Housing Affordability
Some economists warn that offering 50-year mortgages doesn’t address the root problem: housing supply. If easier financing increases demand without more homes being built, prices could rise — meaning the new loan doesn’t actually make housing more accessible.

What Some Economists Think

• John Campbell (Harvard University): Says a 50-year fixed mortgage “isn’t quite as outlandish as it sounds.”
• Eric Zwick (University of Chicago): Believes it’s “not obviously so different from a 30-year fixed mortgage.”
• Joel Berner (Realtor.com economist): Notes that while monthly savings may help, “lenders will demand more” because of the longer loan.
• Chris Hendrix (NBKC Bank): Warns that for the first many years, borrowers are essentially paying interest-only.

Broader Economic Implications

Some analysts worry that widespread adoption of 50-year mortgages could distort broader economic policy. Fixed-rate loans already limit how much the Federal Reserve can influence consumer behavior through interest rate changes.

Also, longer mortgage durations might exaggerate wealth inequality: homeowners who know how to refinance or leverage equity could benefit more, while others don’t.

The Bottom Line

A 50-year mortgage could offer short-term relief — lower monthly payments, and a sense of stability for some buyers. But the long-term costs are steep: dramatically more interest paid, very slow equity growth, and potentially being tied to a home (and a loan) for much of your life.

Many economists argue that real housing affordability would be better addressed through increased homebuilding, not longer loans.

If you’re considering taking on a long-term mortgage, it’s crucial to understand both the math and the risks. This isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution — for some, it could be a helpful tool; for others, a financial trap.