Pay or not pay charged-off accounts for mortgage qualification
"Your post has some assumptions that are not, or may not be true. For one the assumption is that you have to wait 7 years after you settle your debts to buy a home.  That is not the case.  For some people (me included) settling an charged off debt was part of my mortgage application process.  It was a small debt that a doctor's office claimed I owed, but I didn't.  The mortgage company told me, settling the debt was ""the cost of doing business"".  Settling your debts can be looked as favorable. Option 1, in my opinion is akin to stealing.  You borrowed the money and you are seeking to game the system by not paying your debts.  Would you want someone to do that to you?  IIRC the debt can be sold to another company, and the time period is refreshed and can stay on your credit report for beyond the 7 years.  I could be wrong, but I feel like there is a way for potential lenders to see unresolved accounts well beyond specified time periods.  After all, the lenders are the credit reporting agencies customers and they seek to provide the most accurate view of a potential lender.  With 20K of unresolved CC debt they should point that out to their customers. Option 2:  Do you have 20K?  I'd still seek to settle, you do not have to wait 7 years.   Your home may not appreciate in 2 years.  In my own case my home has appricated very little in the 11 years that I have owned it.  Many people have learned the hard way that homes do not necessarily increase in value.   It is very possible that you may have a net loss in equity in two years.  Repairs or improvements can evaporate the small amount of equity that is achieved over two years with a 30 year mortgage.   I would hope that you pause a bit at the fact that you defaulted on 20K in debt.  That is a lot of money.  Although it is a lot, it is a small amount in comparison to the cost and maintenance of a home.  Are you prepared to handle such a responsibility?  What has changed in your personality since the 20K default?  The tone of your posts suggests you are headed for the same sort of calamity. This is far more than a numbers game it is behavioral."
"Your actual question is a bit confusing, but parts of it are answerable. If your parents give you cash to buy a home, you use it for a cash sale, and you then repay them, then if they don't charge you interest (above and beyond any they may pay - treat their loan as entirely separate from yours.) that amount of not-charged interest is considered a gift.  You can look up these rates here, on the IRS website, called ""Applicable Federal Rates""; currently it's around 2.30% APR.  If the interest is that much, the interest isn't a gift, but part of a loan - though your parents will have to file some paperwork and you will also.  Search for more information about ""Intra-Family Loans"" for full details - and talk to a real estate lawyer. Separately, if your parents are the primary/only signors on the mortgage, and are thus effectively the property owner, there are two separate issues.  First, you're welcome to pay off the mortgage while you live there, and no tax issues exist (then) in terms of gift, though it's still owned in your parents' name - so you don't get the house, they'd have to gift that to you separately, though they can do that in stages to avoid gift tax ($14k worth of equity per year, or whatever the current year's annual limit is, per parent and per you/wife if applicable). H&R Block discusses the concept of Equitable Ownership, which determines who is able to take the property tax and mortgage interest deductions on the house.  Tax Almanac goes into a bit more detail on the subject.  Ultimately, another issue for a real estate attorney probably (or at least a CPA or tax attorney): you need to be very careful if you're going to try and get the tax deductions (which would be probably far more than the savings of a half percent of interest rate or whatnot).   In general, there are a lot of options for exactly how you structure the purchase, payments, and equity, and you should talk to a professional to find out exactly the right way to structure it.   This mortgage info site has some good tips for several different ways to structure things, just as an example. I would in particular suggest you pay attention to deductability of mortgage interest and property taxes, as those two can be a huge amount of tax savings and you can lose that very easily if you're not careful." To answer your question: As far as what's available in addition to your 401(k) at work (most financial types will say to contribute up to the match first), you may qualify for a Roth IRA (qualification is based on income), if not, then you may have to go with a Traditional IRA.  You and your husband can each have one and contribute up to the limit each year.  After that, you could get just a straight up mutual fund, and/or contribute up to limit on your 401(k). My two cents: This may sound counter-intuitive (and I'm sure some folks will disagree), but instead of contributing to your 401(k) now, take whatever that amount is, and use it to pay extra on the car loan.  Also take the extra being paid on the mortgage and pay it on the car loan too.  Once the car loan is paid off, then set aside 15% of your gross income and use that amount to start your retirement investing.   Any additional money beyond this can then go into the mortgage.  Once it's paid off, then you can take the extra you were paying, plus the mortgage and invest that amount into mutual funds. You may want to check out Chris Hogan's Retire Inspired book or podcast as well. Ditto to Victor. The simple rule is: Pay the minimums on all so you don't get any late fees, etc, then pay off the highest interest rate loan first. A couple of special cases do come to mind: If one or more of these are credit cards, then, here in the U.S. at least, credit cards charge you interest on the average daily balance, unless you pay off the balance entirely, in which case you pay zero interest. So for example say you had two credit cards, both with 1% per month interest, with debt of $2000 and $1000. You have $1500 available. Ignoring minimum payments for the moment, if you put that $1500 against the larger balance, you would still pay interest on the full amount for the current month, or $30. But if you paid off the smaller and put the difference against the larger, then your interest for the current month would be only $15. (Either way, your interest for NEXT month would be the same -- 1% of the $1500 remaining balance or $15 -- assuming you couldn't pay off the other card.)  If one or more of the loans are mortgage loans on which you are paying mortgage insurance, then when you get the balance below a certain point -- usually 80% of the original loan amount -- you no longer have to pay mortgage insurance premiums. Thus the amount you are paying on such premiums needs to be factored into the calculation. There may be other special cases. Those are the ones that I've run into. The calculations you suggest have some issues, but I think they are not necessary to answer the question: It sounds like you are buying the house either way. So the question really is simply whether to pay toward your house first or your loan first.  In that case, the answer is simple: pay whichever has the highest interest rate first.  Make the minimum payment on the other until the first is paid off.  Remember this and make it your mantra for the rest of your life.  If you have any debts (such as credit cards) that charge a rate higher than the two options you have presented, do them first. Now, be careful as you compute the interest rates.  Most likely you can deduct interest on your mortgage, so its effective interest rate is lower [it is (1-T)*R instead of R, where T is your marginal tax rate]. For a while, the cost of mortgage insurance will make your effective mortgage rate artificially high, but it sounds like you intend to get to that 20% hurdle pretty fast, so my guess is that this is not a big factor. Congratulations on your bonus and good luck with your new home. "I went through the process so I'll add my experience for posterity. On the morning of the day I was ready to pay, I went to my mortgage company's web site and got an instant payoff statement dated for the same day. This had the final payoff amount as well as addresses to send checks and information about wiring. I printed this statement out and took it to my bank the same day and told them that I wanted to wire money. They referred to the printout and sent the money to the mortgage company. The next day, the mortgage company web site indicated that the loan was paid in full. Although sending a check (and the payoff statement indicated that cashier's checks were ""preferred""), wiring the money was an easy process and helped me to overcome my concerns about  situations that  might arise if mail had been used (i.e. I did not want to deal with the complexity of day-late/day-early fees/credits, and I did not want to worry about the complexity of potentially losing a cashier's check in the mail)." FICO is a financial services company, whose customers are financial services companies.  Their products are for the benefit of their customers, not consumers. The purpose of the credit score system is two-fold.  First, the credit score is intended to make it easy for lending institutions (FICO's customers) to assess the risk of loans that they make.  This is probably based on science, although the FICO studies and even the FICO score formula are proprietary secrets. The second purpose of the credit score is to incentivize consumers into borrowing money.  And they have done a great job of that.  If you think you might need a loan in the future, perhaps a mortgage or a car loan, you need a credit score.  And the only way to get a credit score is to start borrowing money now that you don't need.   Yes, someone with a good income and a long history of paying utility bills on time would be a great credit risk for a mortgage.  However, that person will have no credit score, and therefore be declared by FICO as a bad credit risk.  On the other hand, someone with a low income, who struggles, but succeeds, to make the minimum payment on their credit card, would have a better credit score.  The advice offered to the first person is start borrowing money now, even though you don't need it. I'm not anti-credit card.  I use a credit card responsibly, paying it off in full every month.  I use it for the convenience.  I don't worry at all about my credit score, but I've been told it is great.  However, there are some people that cannot use a credit card responsibly.  The temptation is too great.  Perhaps they are like problem gamblers, I don't know.  But FICO and the financial services industry have created a system that makes a credit card a necessity in many ways.  These are the people that get hurt in the current system. I think everyone else answered before you added the info about your car loan in your comment. While it makes sense to pay off loans with the highest interest rate first, keep in mind that in most cases you can deduct mortgage interest from your taxable income. So the after-tax rate of interest that you're paying on your 8.6% second mortgage will be less than your 7% car loan, assuming that your tax bracket is more than 18% (federal and state combined). If you plan to use your funds to pay down debt, definitely attack the car loan first. I think is an excellent idea. Use free money or almost free to do a lump sump payment. My recommendation is to have a reminder to pay credit card before, almost finishing, the 0% APR period.