Defeasance

Why would someone choose defeasance over paying pre-payment penalty directly?

Is it bc through defeasance (purchased securities to pay back interest difference) you can use leverage and borrow money to purchase those securities whereas by paying the pre-payment penalty you cannot use leverage to pay back?

7 Comments
 

To note, I've only been on the "borrower" side of the world, and did debt placement type work a long time, so... I may be out of date with current practice... but..

I always thought that some would only use defeasance because they had to, meaning the loan was not pre-payable otherwise. Not all commercial loans have a "pre-payment option" until several years into the loan, thus only a defeasance can work (i.e. a collateral swap that replicates the payment steam of the mortgage). If you could just pay a "penalty" and walk away, I think you would do that unless the defeasance was a cheaper option (which I really doubt it would be). 

 

I agree - defeasance and yield maintenance (YM) are types of prepay penalties, which typically follow a lock out for fixed rate loans. Defeasance is much more punitive to the borrower than YM (which usually is typically some sort of fixed or descending penalty scale), which is why choosing YM will typically come with some sort of extra up front fee. I can't think of any situation in which defeasance would be advantageous to YM, unless you are trying to pay off a loan with only a few months of remaining term.

If your only other option was a lockout than you would really only want to do the collateral swap if interest rates happened to significantly rise (these days it would have to rise 200-300bps+). Then, if I understand your question, you are asking if you can leverage your swapped collateral? I'm not sure if the lender would allow that as collateral is typically treasuries and leveraging treasuries would be subject to significant interest rate/spread risk.

 

My only addition is that while many refer to Yield Maintenance as a penalty, in fact it is a contracted fee. The provision was litigated by AIG back in 2007 and they ultimately won.  In fact the court found “nothing to "convince" it that the prepayment provision was a disguised penalty.”  “In reversing the district court, the Seventh Circuit began by noting that "prepayment clauses are nothing new." The court framed the question before it as whether an Illinois court would consider the prepayment provision in the note a penalty that is unenforceable or a contract for alternative performance.”

Where as a penalty may not be obligated to be paid by a borrower, but contracted fee is.  So just a pet peeve of mine when people call YM a penalty BUT also something that could be used against a lender if they refer to the fee as a penalty, and borrower then argues that the lender says it’s a penalty and the penalty is unreasonable. So always best to refer it to a fee. 

Sorry for side bar discussion and not truly on point of the OP. 

https://www.duanemorris.com/articles/article2735.html

 

I may be wrong, but I thought on most loans the prepayment penalty is only an option in the final 1 or 2 years of the term, and if you prepay earlier you have to use defeasance.  So its not really a question of which is preferable (prepayment is more preferable), its more about how long into the term you are looking to prepay.

 
Most Helpful

Generally defeasance is a requirement to pre-pay CMBS loans; there is not another "option" to choose from. This is because the loans have been packaged, sliced up and sold to investors that guaranty monthly payments. Defeasance is the mechanism that allows the bond holders to continue to receive those monthly payments.

I am unfamilair with any scenario in which you could choose to defease or "pay pre-payment penalty direct." Not really sure what you're asking.

 

Deserunt aperiam qui ratione eos. Magni sint maiores earum quibusdam quaerat quaerat. Et aut libero odit nesciunt qui esse. Non quo officiis amet explicabo corrupti ut non.

Rerum sed animi reprehenderit vero. Unde in recusandae sint ut. Inventore id dolor aut ut ipsa aspernatur neque. Et laudantium et aspernatur et consectetur. Eaque assumenda qui nobis ipsa ab porro.

Nisi aut pariatur autem odit eos sit non. Sit esse ut sint voluptatem.

Career Advancement Opportunities

August 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 08 97.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 02 97.2%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

August 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.3%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.8%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.2%

Professional Growth Opportunities

August 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 06 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 97.2%

Total Avg Compensation

August 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (47) $258
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (25) $178
  • Intern/Summer Associate (14) $159
  • 1st Year Analyst (83) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (74) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
8
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
9
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
10
Mimbs's picture
Mimbs
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”