CA challenges ‘buy your home early’ advice: Why your 30s should focus on wealth building

For many young professionals, buying a home early is seen as the ultimate sign of financial success. But CA Nitin Kaushik believes this conventional advice deserves a rethink. In a post on X, he argued that the years between 25 and 40 should be focused on building assets rather than simply increasing savings or rushing into homeownership. His approach puts equity, land, liquidity, debt and additional income at the centre of wealth creation, while treating a primary home as a financial choice rather than an obligation.

CA says your 30s are the key wealth-building years

CA Nitin Kaushik took to X and shared that the financial pressure of the 50s can increase rapidly. Children’s education, weddings, rising healthcare expenses and greater family responsibilities can arrive at the same time that salary growth starts slowing and employment leverage declines.

He believes this makes the earlier years particularly important. According to Kaushik, the period between 25 and 40 should focus on asset accumulation, rather than simply trying to achieve a higher savings rate.


His suggested framework includes equity index funds for liquidity and long-term compounding, EPF, PPF and debt investments for stability, carefully selected land in growth corridors for scarcity value, and a secondary income stream that can help accelerate asset purchases.

Why CA questions buying a home early

One of the strongest arguments in Kaushik’s post is against treating early homeownership as an automatic financial milestone. He challenged the conventional advice to “buy your home as early as possible”, pointing out that a Rs 1 crore home financed largely through debt could tie a young professional to a 15 to 20-year EMI.

The issue, he argues, is not simply whether someone can afford the monthly payment. Instead, buyers should consider “what am I giving up to pay it?” A large home loan can reduce the amount of capital available for equity SIPs, business opportunities, land purchases and emergency or liquidity buffers. For someone still in the wealth accumulation stage, that opportunity cost can be significant.

Homeownership should not come at the cost of wealth creation

Kaushik’s argument is not that people should never buy a house. Rather, he believes homeownership should be evaluated within the broader balance sheet. A primary home can make sense when the EMI does not compromise wealth creation. Housing security and the possibility of avoiding rental expenses in retirement can eventually outweigh the opportunity cost of locking money into property.

But buying a home simply because it is considered the financially responsible thing to do can potentially leave a young professional with a large asset and limited liquidity. As Kaushik puts it, “Homeownership is a choice”, and it should not automatically become the biggest financial commitment on the balance sheet.

Land and apartments are not the same investment

Another distinction Kaushik makes is between buying a plot of land and purchasing an apartment. He argues that the two should not automatically be treated as equivalent investments. An apartment comes with a physical structure that can depreciate, along with maintenance expenses and, often, relatively low rental yields.

A plot, on the other hand, does not carry the same building depreciation or recurring maintenance burden. In emerging infrastructure corridors, Kaushik says land values can be influenced by scarcity and public infrastructure rather than the earning capacity of a structure built on the property. This makes land, in his framework, a potential component of an asset portfolio rather than simply an alternative to an apartment.

Renting can also be a rational financial decision

Kaushik also challenges the idea that renting is automatically inferior to buying. While urban rents can rise by 8 to 10% annually, renting can preserve capital and provide greater flexibility when purchasing a home would require a substantial down payment and a long-term EMI commitment.

For investors who place a high value on liquidity and equity compounding, he argues that renting can be a rational choice. The decision ultimately comes down to whether the benefits of owning a primary residence outweigh the opportunity cost of putting a large amount of capital into property.

Why a second income can accelerate wealth creation

Kaushik identifies dependence on a salary as another potential weakness in a long-term wealth-building strategy. A salary generally grows alongside career progression and the amount of time a person can devote to work. Assets, however, can continue compounding without requiring additional working hours.

That is why he suggests treating side income differently from regular lifestyle income. Consulting, a business, digital income or another cash-flow stream can instead be directed towards equity SIPs, land or other productive assets. In this approach, additional income becomes an “asset acquisition engine” rather than simply funding higher consumption.

What CA’s wealth-building framework looks like

The broader philosophy shared by CA Nitin Kaushik is built around creating a diversified balance sheet during the prime earning and accumulation years.

His framework can be summed up as:
- Equity for compounding
- Land for scarcity
- Debt for stability
- Liquidity for flexibility
- Additional income for leverage

A home can still form part of this portfolio. The key, according to the CA, is ensuring that the EMI does not consume so much cash flow that it prevents other assets from being accumulated. For him, the objective of the 30s is therefore not simply to become a homeowner. It is to build a balance sheet capable of providing greater financial choices later in life.

As Kaushik puts it, “The objective of your 30s isn’t to own a house at any cost.” The bigger goal is to reach a stage where, by 50, financial security depends less on how much one earns and more on “how much of your lifestyle your assets can fund without your salary.”