Interesting scenario...

A loan to a church (entity) to purchase an SFR for the pastor to live in as their primary residence.

Clearly exempt from Reg Z, but I am thinking about RESPA. - Exemption under RESPA would rely on the Reg Z business purpose test.

The loan is to an entity to provide a benefit to their employee (business purpose) - however, there is a piece of my brain playing devil's advocate since it is for the purpose of purchasing a primary residence.

Trying to figure out how to shore up my argument to demonstrate it is clearly business purpose. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

The church is buying a house. Whether they rent it to the pastor or allow the pastor to live in it, it is still the church's house and an asset on the church's books, for which the church must account for accordingly along with any income derived or the pastor has to properly report the housing allowance.

https://www.irs.gov/faqs/interest-divide...using-allowance

There is no personal purpose here.

I agree. Even if the pastor pays no rent, the church isn't borrowing for its personal, family or household purpose. It's borrowing to fulfill its agreement, binding or otherwise, to provide a residence for its pastor.

This is a great example of the fabulous community we have here at BOL. It is the odd issues like this that are enough to throw us off and make us pause & wonder... and it is so nice to have gurus offer their wisdom so quickly and helpfully.

Appreciate the responses everyone. That was my thought process but wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something

Appreciate the help!!

and RebekahL - it's definitely the one offs that get us.. praise to the gurus!

Thank you!

Appreciative comments are always welcome in these discussions. Many of the questions raised here come up when someone's second guessing themselves after deciding a course of action. It's great to get an assurance that one's decision is the right one in those circumstances. Been there, and have the t-shirt.