Skip to content
STI
← Back to Blog

Should I Pay for Private School or Move Districts With Mortgage Rates Above 7%? A 5-Test Checklist for October 2026

It's October 1, 2026, and you have two numbers on the kitchen table. One is an $18,500 tuition invoice for your kindergartner. The other is a listing in the next district over that costs $90,000 more than a comparable house in yours.

This morning NerdWallet's daily rate report was titled "Mortgage Rates Today, Thursday, October 1: Rates Rise Sharply," and it described house hunters getting "an early dose of October sticker shock." Its weekly roundup, "Weekly Mortgage Rates Find a New Normal Above 7%," says it's OK to reevaluate your homebuying plans during the slow fall and winter months.

So which is cheaper over 13 years: paying tuition or buying into the better district? The answer depends on five things that are specific to your family. This post gives you five tests, a worked example for one child and two, and the places where the answer flips.

The example family and its assumptions

Everything below is a worked example, not a quote or a prediction. Swap in your own numbers.

  • Tuition: $18,500 in year one, rising 4% a year. That comes to $307,600 over 13 years (18,500 × (1.04¹³ − 1) ÷ 0.04).
  • House premium: $90,000 for the better district. I assume 20% down ($18,000), a $72,000 loan at 7.1% for 30 years, and property tax of 1.1% of the premium ($990 a year). NerdWallet reports rates above 7%, and 7.1% is my pick within that range.
  • Down payment opportunity cost: 5% a year on the $18,000.
  • Premium retained: I assume you recover the premium when you sell. The real cost of the premium is then interest, tax, and the return you gave up on the down payment.
  • ESA or voucher: $7,000 a year, flat. This is hypothetical. Availability, amounts, and eligibility vary a lot by state.

Here is the one-child comparison, counting only the dollars that exist in one path and not the other:

Path (one child)5-year cost13-year cost
Private tuition, no ESA$100,200$307,600
Private tuition, $7,000 flat ESA$65,200$216,600
Better district, $90,000 premium at 7.1%$34,800$89,500
Stay put, public school$0$0

The 13-year premium figure breaks down as about $60,700 in interest, $12,900 in property tax, and $15,900 in lost return on the down payment. That averages about $6,900 a year, against tuition that starts at $18,500 and climbs.

This is the kind of side-by-side Zuvelanti builds for you, so you don't have to rebuild the amortization schedule by hand.

On these assumptions the premium looks much cheaper than tuition. But tuition and premium aren't the same product. The five tests below show when this table misleads you.

Test 1: The fee-use test (what are you actually buying?)

NerdWallet's piece "Is the New IHG Premium Card Worth Its $350 Fee?" starts from a simple point. If you're planning to stay at IHG hotels this year, you already have a strong reason to hold the card. The fee is only worth paying if you use the benefit.

Tuition works the same way, at a much larger scale. $18,500 is about 53 times that $350 fee. So what specific, nameable thing are you buying? It might be a class size, a learning-support service, a language or faith program, or a school that fits a particular kid. Write it down and put a price on it.

The admission-probability adjustment belongs here too, and it's the shakiest input in the model. Here is a deliberately rough example. Say private school raises your child's odds of getting into a target college by 3 percentage points, and getting in is worth $100,000 more to you in lifetime outcomes. The expected value is $3,000, against $307,600 in tuition. Both inputs are placeholders. The point is that an admissions bump almost never carries the financial case alone, so it shouldn't be the main reason on your list.

If your reason is non-financial, that's a legitimate reason. Just treat tuition as a purchase and not as an investment.

Test 2: The rate-reset test (does moving reprice your whole loan?)

The rate rise matters less to the premium than you'd expect. Here is the same $72,000 premium loan at two rates:

Rate on the $72,000 premium loanInterest over 13 years
6.5%about $55,100
7.1%about $60,700

That's roughly $5,600 of difference across 13 years, which is small next to the $307,600 tuition stream.

The bigger issue is who you are. If you're renting, or already planning to buy, the table above is the whole story. If you already own a house with a low rate, moving reprices your entire balance, not just the premium.

Take an example homeowner with a $300,000 balance at 3.5%. A new loan at 7.1% on that same balance adds about $10,800 in year-one interest, since (7.1% − 3.5%) × $300,000 = $10,800. Add the roughly $6,950 of first-year premium carrying cost, and the first year of moving costs about $17,750. That's close to year-one tuition of $18,500, and it still excludes agent fees, closing costs, and movers. Those depend on your own quotes, and they're often the line people forget.

So for a homeowner with a low-rate mortgage, "move to the better district" and "pay tuition" can start out nearly even. They diverge later, because tuition grows 4% a year while a fixed-rate payment doesn't. For a renter, moving wins by a wide margin.

This is also why the "new normal above 7%" story matters differently by household. If you're not locked into a low rate, it barely changes your comparison. If you are, it's the most important variable you have. We covered the mechanics in an earlier look at what 7% mortgage rates do to the private school vs. school district gap.

Test 3: The Prime Day test (count only what you wouldn't buy anyway)

NerdWallet's Prime Day essay, "I Have One Rule for Shopping Amazon Prime Day — and It Saves Me Big," boils down to this: no splurging, just restocking what you'd buy anyway at a discount.

That rule cleans up the school math in two ways.

Count incremental dollars only. Tuition exists only in the private path. Premium carrying costs exist only in the move path. Costs that show up in every path, like supplies and a baseline of activities, shouldn't be on either side of the comparison. Say your public-school extras run $3,000 a year, growing 3%. That's about $46,900 over 13 years, and it's a real cost. It only belongs in the comparison if one path avoids it.

Don't let a discount turn a "no" into a "yes." An ESA is a discount on tuition. It isn't a reason to buy tuition. In the example, a $7,000 ESA drops year-one cost from $18,500 to $11,500, and the 13-year total from $307,600 to $216,600. That is still a $216,600 commitment. Ask whether you'd choose this school at full price. If you wouldn't, the discount doesn't change the answer.

You can model your own incremental costs, with and without an ESA, at Zuvelanti.

Test 4: The funding-source stress test (where does the money come from?)

Mr. Money Mustache's post "Will the AI Bubble Destroy our Retirement?" opens by noting how the market keeps surprising us. Crashes make us worry as the retirement stash shrinks, and record highs are strange in their own way. I'll leave his conclusions to his post. What I'll borrow is the question underneath: what happens to your plan if your funding source drops right when you need it?

Here's a simple example. A family earmarks a $60,000 brokerage balance to cover the first three years of tuition ($18,500 + $19,240 + $20,010 = $57,750). If the market falls 30%, the balance becomes $42,000. That covers about 2.2 years, not three, and you'd be selling at the bottom to make up the gap.

Run this check for each path:

  • Paying from salary: tuition is a fixed bill that grows 4% a year. Can your income cover that if a job is lost or wages stall?
  • Paying from market assets or stock comp: how many months of tuition survive a 30% drop? Whatever you pay in tuition is also money that isn't compounding for retirement.
  • Buying the premium: it ties you to the housing market and to a fixed payment. And "premium retained at resale" is an assumption. School boundaries and ratings change.

Neither path is risk-free. They fail in different ways. Tuition fails if your income or portfolio gets squeezed. The premium fails if the premium doesn't hold, or if you have to sell at a bad time.

Test 5: The multiplier test (kids, timing, and ESA durability)

This is where the two paths scale very differently. Tuition is charged per child. The house premium is charged per household.

Take two kids three years apart. The second child's 13 years of tuition run from calendar years 4 through 16, at higher prices. That works out to $346,000 for child two, on top of $307,600 for child one. The premium then has to be carried for 16 years, until the younger child graduates.

Path (two kids, 3 years apart, 16-year horizon)Total cost
Private tuition, no ESA$653,600
Private tuition, $7,000 flat ESA per child$471,600
Better district, $90,000 premium at 7.1% (16 years)$109,500
Stay put, public school$0

With two kids, the gap between tuition and the premium is about $544,000 without an ESA, or about $362,000 with one. The premium cost per child roughly halves, and tuition per child doesn't.

Two cautions on the ESA line. First, I held it flat. If your state indexes it to tuition, your net cost falls further. Second, ESA programs can be income-tested, capped, or changed by legislatures, so don't build a 13-year plan on a program that could shift in year three.

For a deeper look at how two-kid math changes the picture, see our two-kid private vs. public breakdown from September 2026.

When the answer flips

None of these paths wins everywhere. Here is where the example changes direction:

  • One child, low-rate homeowner, state ESA available. Moving can cost nearly as much as tuition in year one, once you count repricing and moving costs. Staying put and paying net tuition may beat it.
  • Two or more kids, renter or buyer, no ESA. The premium wins by a wide margin in these assumptions. Tuition scales per child and the premium doesn't.
  • A specific program your child needs. If the benefit is concrete and not available in the better district, Test 1 may justify tuition on its own.
  • A premium that doesn't hold. If boundaries move or the premium shrinks, the cost of the district path is higher than I've shown.
  • A strained funding source. If tuition would come from a volatile portfolio or irregular income, stress it first.

Public school in your current district stays the baseline in every comparison. It's the path with the lowest cost, and for many families it's also the right answer.

A quick checklist to take with you

  1. Name the benefit. What exactly would tuition buy, and what would you pay for it separately?
  2. Price the reset. Are you a renter, or a homeowner whose whole loan reprices if you move?
  3. Count incremental dollars only. Would you choose this school at full price, before any ESA?
  4. Stress the source. How many years of tuition survive a 30% market drop?
  5. Multiply by kids. Does tuition per child or premium per household fit your family size?

For the full variable list behind these tests, see our 5-variable formula for the 13-year cost of private school. If you want a shorter version, our 9-number checklist covers the basics.

Run it for your numbers

Remember that every figure here comes from an example family, and your numbers will differ based on your specific situation. Your tuition, your rate, your premium, your ESA rules, and your number of kids will change the answer, sometimes by six figures.

If you'd like to see the comparison for your household, you can enter your own tuition, premium, mortgage rate, ESA, and number of children at Zuvelanti. It models 13-year costs for each path side by side, so you can see where your break-even point is before you commit to anything. If the math says stay put, that's a good answer too.

Sources

Ready to compare school costs?

Compare School Costs Free