Even the world’s most affluent people sometimes need a mortgage.
Elon Musk is the world’s richest man, on track to become the first-ever trillionaire (or may already be one), but he’s done one thing most average Americans have to do: take out a mortgage.
The Tesla CEO has taken out several mega mortgages, including $61 million from Morgan Stanley, on five properties in California, according to the Los Angeles Times. That’s barely a drop in the bucket of his now-$703 billion net worth, so it could be difficult to understand why he’d borrow tens of millions of dollars to buy real estate.
But financial experts say taking out a mortgage—even when you could easily pay cash—can actually be a smart wealth strategy.
Why wealthy buyers still take out mortgages
One of the main reasons is that most of the wealth held by UHNW people is tied up in investments, stocks, and bonds, and they don’t keep as much liquid cash on hand.
Advertisement
“Ultrahigh-net-worth individuals think differently about liquidity and leverage,” Miltiadis Kastanis, executive director of sales at Compass, told Fortune. “They’d rather keep their money working for them in investments, businesses—or even art—rather than tying it all up in one property.”
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, the world’s seventh-richest man, has also used mortgages to his advantage. In 2012, Zuckerberg refinanced his Palo Alto home with a 30-year, 1.05% adjustable-rate mortgage, according to CNBC. With such a low rate, the mortgage cost him practically nothing, so it didn’t make sense to have nearly $6 million tied up in a home. Plus, borrowing during the era of ultralow interest rates in the 2010s was especially attractive. Many wealthy buyers locked in mortgages at a much lower rate than today’s.
“If they believe their investments will yield a greater return than the interest they’re paying on a mortgage, it makes more sense to finance the property,” Kastanis added. “It’s less about the cost of the loan itself and more about optimizing where their money is placed.”
Mortgage interest can also be tax deductible on loans up to $750,000 for those who itemize when filing their taxes. While Zuckerberg’s mortgage was more than that, he can likely deduct at least part of his mortgage interest, which further reduces borrowing costs.
“Mortgages also allow for tax optimization in some jurisdictions, as interest payments may be deductible,” Islay Robinson, founder and CEO of mortgage brokerage Enness Global, told Fortune. “And in high-inflation environments, the value of money erodes over time, making it advantageous to borrow now and repay later.”
Advertisement
Celebrities use the same strategy
Many celebrities and wealthy buyers take the same approach.
Take Paris Hilton, who took out a mortgage on the $63 million mansion she bought from Mark Wahlberg in Beverly Hills. Hilton is estimated to be worth between $300 million and $400 million.
What’s even more interesting is that she and her husband, Carter Reum, reportedly took out the loan after they had already bought the 12-bed, 20-bath home, which shows a $43.75 million mortgage with JPMorgan Chase at an interest rate of 5.25%.
“It surprises many people, but it’s actually quite common for the mega-wealthy to take out mortgages—even when they could write a check for the full purchase price,” Evan Harlow, real estate agent at Maui Elite Property, previously told Fortune.
Tax and inflation advantages of taking out a mortgage
Another reason ultrawealthy buyers borrow rather than pay cash is that they often take out loans backed by their investment portfolios. Known as securities-based lending, these loans allow clients to borrow against stocks or other assets without selling them and triggering capital gains taxes. Large banks often promote these types of loans to wealthy clients.
Advertisement
“Rather than selling your public market investments to raise money, borrowing against your assets can allow you to stay the course on your investments, defer taxes, and free up money for other opportunities,” according to J.P. Morgan. “It’s a way to tap into the value of what you own while keeping your financial plans intact.”
Because borrowed money is not treated as taxable income under U.S. law, wealthy individuals can finance spending by taking loans against their assets without triggering income taxes. Analysts often describe the practice as “buy, borrow, die”: accumulate appreciating investments, borrow against them to fund consumption, and ultimately pass those assets to heirs with a stepped-up basis that largely eliminates the accumulated capital gains tax.
What everyday buyers can learn
For billionaires and everyday buyers alike, the decision ultimately comes down to how they want their money working. Is it better to lock it into a house—or invest elsewhere?
“The takeaway for the average buyer isn’t to mimic their precise approach, but to understand the principle,” Harlow said. “Sometimes the smartest financial move isn’t paying everything off, but keeping your money flexible and working for you.”
A version of this story was originally published on Fortune.com on March 9, 2026.
SixCap Healthcare Finance added Dan Carroll as senior relationship manager, reporting to the company’s co-founder and chief investment officer, Dan Whitwer.
Carroll brings more than 20 years of commercial finance, portfolio management and healthcare asset-based lending experience to SixCap. Throughout his career, he has managed complex healthcare lending relationships, led portfolio management teams, overseen loan closings and partnered closely with borrowers to support growth while maintaining disciplined credit management.
Most recently, Carroll held leadership positions at Siena, CNH Finance and Triumph Healthcare Finance, building extensive expertise in healthcare lending, credit analysis, loan structuring, risk management and client relationship management.
In his new role, Carroll will oversee borrower relationships across SixCap’s growing healthcare portfolio, working closely with clients to provide proactive portfolio management, responsive service and financing solutions that evolve alongside their businesses.
“We’re thrilled to welcome Dan to the SixCap team,” Whitwer said. “I’ve had the privilege of working alongside Dan and have seen firsthand the integrity, experience and thoughtful approach he brings to every client relationship. He understands healthcare, he understands asset-based lending and, most importantly, he understands the value of building lasting partnerships. As our portfolio continues to grow, Dan’s leadership and commitment to exceptional client service make him a tremendous addition to our team.”
Two of Chicago’s most pivotal but challenging undeveloped sites — Foundry Park on the North Side and the vacant South Loop parcel known as The 78 — moved forward in a big way Wednesday before the City Council adjourned for a summer recess.
Mayor Brandon Johnson introduced a $201.6 million tax increment financing subsidy for JDL Development’s scaled back vision for North Side industrial land along the Chicago River that once was supposed to be home to the Lincoln Yards megaproject.
And despite a slew of concerns from Council members, the full Council approved a $425 million TIF for The 78, a reference to Chicago’s unofficial 78th community area. The subsidy will bankroll public improvements needed for the South Loop development, anchored by a $750 million soccer stadium privately financed by Chicago Fire billionaire owner Joe Mansueto.
Downtown Ald. Bill Conway (34th), whose adjacent TIF is being raided to help The 78, again refused to go along with the $250.1 million piece of the infrastructure package that will primarily be used to build a 1,200-space parking garage. The $216 million garage will serve as the “podium” for an open-air plaza and future high-rise development on the air rights above the garage.
Referring to the Bears’ long-running stadium saga, Conway said Wednesday he appreciates the Fire “not trying to move to Hammond, Indiana, and become the Hammond Sparks.” But he said he “cannot look the taxpayers in the eye and tell them” he supported spending “$250 million to build a stadium parking garage and plaza.”
Advertisement
Finance Chair Pat Dowell, whose 3rd Ward includes The 78, has argued that the podium “brings the site to grade at Roosevelt Road” and is the key to “unlocking the site from the isolation that has stalled every previous development proposal.”
Deputy Planning Commissioner Jeff Cohen made that same point Wednesday, with a new wrinkle.
“The idea here is to incorporate that garage into the podium,” Cohen said. “It’s addressing a design and development plan that allows for all of the land within The 78 to be open for investment, rather than having to have either temporary or permanent surface parking lots to accommodate the car traffic.”
An artist’s rendering of the planned Chicago Fire soccer stadium at The 78 in the South Loop.
Advertisement
Related Midwest & Gensler
The $201.6 million subsidy proposed for Foundry Park pales by comparison to the $1.3 billion that former Mayor Rahm Emanuel once proposed for Lincoln Yards. That massive subsidy became a political lightning rod, with the avalanche of criticism led by the Chicago Teachers Union and then-union organizer Brandon Johnson.
The $201.6 million subsidy that Johnson introduced at Wednesday’s Council meeting is more likely to be criticized for being too little.
It will support just over 25% of the $800 million worth of roads, bridges, utilities and mass transit improvements that 2nd Ward Ald. Brian Hopkins has said were mandated as part of the Lincoln Yards plan.
Advertisement
Foundry Park developer Jim Letchinger acknowledged that there is “other infrastructure that the neighborhood would like to see done that is not possible right now.”
But Letchinger added it’s a start that includes the long-promised extension of the popular 606 Trail. “If you don’t start with something that’s achievable, you can’t achieve anything.”
“We have a plan to actually start building and creating revenue right away in conjunction with building our infrastructure … A lot of parks. Massive riverwalk. Ten acres of public open space. Very usable, very engaging,” Letchinger said Wednesday.
“As we continue to build, since we’re not using anywhere near all the increment that we’re creating, the other increment can go toward other projects that the neighborhood would like to see — whether it’s to build a bridge or fixing Elston Avenue, or anything else that they’re anxious about,” he said.
Public improvements promised to residents, but not covered by the $201.6 million subsidy, include another bridge crossing the Chicago River and a realignment of Elston Avenue, which Letchinger called a positive move in the long run, but a “massive undertaking” complicated by cost and property control.
Advertisement
“No private developer can realign Elston. It’s impossible. The city is the only one that can do that, and they’re working on it. There’s plans for it. But it will take a very long time,” Lechtinger said.
Ald. Scott Waguespack (32nd) said there is “one bridge that a lot of people still want,” but it goes through private properties owned by Ozinga Ready Mix Concrete and several other owners.
“The city would have to do it as a taking [of property], and that would be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. So they took that off the table because … that bridge wasn’t necessary at this time,” Waguespack told the Chicago Sun-Times.
Letchinger’s plan for roughly 34 vacant acres of the site calls for up to 3,737 residences, 20% of them designated as affordable to comply with the city’s set-aside rules. The new design includes low- to mid-rise buildings, some for offices, grouped near open space and riverfront access. Buildings would get ground-floor retail, and one is slated as a boutique hotel.
The project’s reduced density has drawn praise from residents. And Waguespack said he’s satisfied with the reduced public subsidy.
Advertisement
“In the future if there’s more needed, we could go back and do it. But this is much more grounded in a realistic infrastructure project that will still satisfy all the needs of connecting the neighborhoods,” Waguespack said.
Hopkins said he views the scaled-down subsidy and the infrastructure projects as “wholly inadequate” and a broken promise to Lincoln Park and Bucktown residents.
“Lincoln Yards provided for two bridges with the possibility of a third. Foundry Park has zero,” Hopkins said. “I don’t want to move on a vague verbal promise that we might consider adding a bridge later. The time to add it is now while the redevelopment agreement is still pending. And the fact that it was omitted is tragic. Also, the [Elston-Armitage] intersection redesign and the new Metra station seems to have fallen by the wayside.”
Also at Wednesday’s meeting, Johnson proposed a tax break for Chicago’s booming film and television industries — by reducing the 15% personal property lease transaction tax to 11%.
The tax has been raised twice in recent years and was the biggest piece of the revenue package that helped balance the $16.7 billion budget for 2026. It has exceeded revenue projections by $40.3 million through June 30, allowing Johnson to offer the break in hopes of attracting more film and TV productions to Chicago.
Advertisement
The City Council also followed a trail blazed by Gov. JB Pritzker and his counterparts in six other states by prohibiting present and former city employees — and elected officials — from using insider information to bet on prediction markets. Apps including Kalshi and Polymarket are used to place bets on everything from election winners and the number of candidates entering a specific race for office, to budgetary and foreign policy decisions by elected officials.
Championed by Ald. Timmy Knudsen (43rd), the ordinance prohibits current or former city officials, appointees and employees from using “confidential information or any non-public information, including the identity of the subject of an investigation” to either participate in prediction markets or “assist any other person” placing those bets.
The Council also confirmed Johnson’s appointment of Dr. Garth Walker as the city’s public health commissioner.
Covering the cost of fertility treatment can feel like yet another hurdle in a process that is already physically and emotionally draining. Not only do you have to go through the testing and medical procedures involved, you can also end up paying tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.
For families who want to have kids or women who want to afford themselves a little more time, though, this can feel like a price well worth paying. But the process may necessitate some financial planning. Research can also go a long way, as insurance companies increasingly offer coverage.
How much can fertility treatments cost?
The cost of fertility treatments can vary widely depending on the specific treatment that is necessary. A “typical egg preservation cycle is about $10,000,” while a frozen embryo transfer “could total about $2,500,” said The Bump. Meanwhile, a procedure like in vitro fertilization (IVF) “could add up to a total of $13,000 to $14,000.” Opting for a surrogate, meanwhile, can run anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
Advertisement
Sign up for The Week’s Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Latest Videos From
There is also the reality that a fertility treatment is not always a one-time thing. In fact, “most people will need more than one cycle to achieve pregnancy,” said The Wall Street Journal.
Can insurance help cover fertility treatments?
Over the past decade, “more companies have already stepped up to help employees,” said Jaime Knopman, a reproductive endocrinologist for CCRM Fertility of New York, to the Journal. Now, said the outlet, “more than 40% of companies offer overall fertility benefits, according to a 2024 survey of employee benefits plans from the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans.”
Still, this does not mean you will get full coverage, and certain parts of the treatment process may not be covered. For example, “your plan may cover fertility medications, but only those of a specific brand. Or it may cover routine lab work, but only at designated labs,” said Discover. This makes it absolutely vital to do in-depth research and ask questions.
Advertisement
If your company does not offer coverage, it could be worth asking HR. “Some patients even successfully lobbied their human-resources departments to change a company’s policies and benefits plans,” said the Journal.
Join 350,000+ subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of
The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories – plus daily puzzles.
What are other options for covering the cost of treatments?
There are options besides your own bank account or insurance for helping to cover the cost of fertility treatments. Some alternatives include:
FSA or HSA funds: Flexible spending accounts, or FSAs, and health savings accounts, or HSAs, “may be used to help pay for IVF and other fertility treatments,” said First Citizens Bank.
Provider payment plans or financial assistance: Your doctor “may offer a payment plan, discounts for uninsured patients or even a shared-risk program,” said Discover.
Advertisement
Nonprofits and charities: There are many “national and local nonprofit organizations that support fertility treatments and related costs,” said Discover. They may have eligibility requirements, however, as some are “established to assist with specific types of patients, while many include income thresholds.”