Quick answer: Indian banks will sanction loans up to a FOIR (Fixed Obligations to Income Ratio) of 50-55% for salaried borrowers, stretching to 60% for high earners — meaning your total EMIs across all loans can reach roughly half your gross monthly income before the bank starts saying no. Financial planners recommend a much tighter 40% maximum on take-home income, all EMIs combined. The gap exists because banks optimise for repayment probability (you can pay 50%+ of your salary as EMI without defaulting), while planners optimise for your long-term financial health (a 50% EMI burden leaves almost nothing for retirement savings, emergencies, or surprises). At ₹1.2 lakh monthly take-home, a 30% EMI burden allows 25% savings rate and produces a ₹5.69 crore corpus over 25 years (at 12% equity CAGR); a 50% EMI burden cuts savings to 10% and produces only ₹2.28 crore — a ₹3.4 crore wealth gap. The right answer for most middle-class households: keep total EMIs under 40% of take-home, and under 35% if you''re also paying high rent or have variable income. Use the FOIR ceiling for the bank''s eligibility calculation, but plan your actual EMI commitment based on the planner ceiling.
Key takeaways
- Banks measure FOIR on gross income and sanction up to 50-55% (sometimes 60% for high earners); financial planners measure on take-home income and recommend a 40% maximum.
- The gap exists because banks optimise for default risk while planners optimise for long-term wealth creation — both views are mathematically valid for their objectives.
- A 30% vs 50% EMI burden over 25 years produces a ₹3.4 crore wealth difference at ₹1.2 lakh monthly take-home — the long-term opportunity cost of high EMI is dramatic.
- Total EMI includes everything fixed and contractual: home loan, car loan, personal loan, credit card minimums, BNPL — not just the home loan.
- The right EMI ceiling depends on income level: 40% is comfortable at ₹2L+ monthly take-home but punishing at ₹40K because absolute residual income matters more than the percentage.
The most common single financial-planning question in India is some variant of "how much home loan can I afford?" — and the standard answer is "around 40% of your salary in EMIs." That advice is correct in spirit but unhelpful in detail. Banks will routinely sanction up to 50-55% of gross monthly income as EMI. Aggressive lenders will go to 60%. None of this matches what financial planners recommend (40% on take-home). The gap isn''t a contradiction; it''s two different parties optimising for two different things — and understanding why each says what they say helps you choose your actual EMI commitment defensibly.
This article walks through the bank''s FOIR methodology, the planner''s 40% rule and the math behind it, three concrete budget breakdowns at 30%/40%/50% EMI burden, the wealth opportunity cost over 25 years, the hidden EMI burden most people miss, and the income-level sensitivity that means the same percentage hits a ₹40K earner very differently from a ₹2L earner. Use Ganak''s Home Loan Eligibility Calculator to model the bank''s view for your specific income and the Take-home Salary Calculator for the planner''s view on your actual disposable income.
The Two Perspectives: Banks vs Planners
The numerical disagreement isn''t random. It reflects two genuinely different optimisation problems.
The bank''s view. A bank''s job is to maximise lending while keeping default risk within tolerable limits. The empirical question for a bank is: at what FOIR level does the probability of EMI default start rising sharply? Decades of lending data across Indian banks has answered this — defaults stay low up to roughly 55% FOIR, rise modestly between 55-65%, and start spiking above 65%. So banks set their sanctioning ceilings at 50-55% (with some flexibility to 60% for high earners) — comfortably below the danger zone, with safety margin built in.
From a bank''s perspective, this isn''t aggressive. It''s a well-calibrated risk decision based on observed default behaviour. A salaried IT professional earning ₹1.5 lakh a month who pays ₹75,000 in EMIs is mathematically capable of doing so — and millions of Indians actually do, year after year.
The planner''s view. A financial planner''s job is different. Banks care whether you''ll keep paying the EMI; planners care whether you''ll achieve your full financial life goals — retirement at the standard you want, children''s education, emergency resilience, the ability to absorb a job loss without selling assets at the wrong time. The planner''s ceiling at 40% comes from working backward from those goals. After EMI and essential expenses, what''s left for savings? At 40% EMI on take-home income, the remainder typically allows 20% mandatory savings — the minimum for serious long-term wealth-building. At 50% EMI, savings drop to 10%, which produces a notably smaller retirement corpus and leaves no buffer for shocks.
Both perspectives are mathematically valid for their respective objectives. The bank is right that you can pay 55% EMI; the planner is right that you probably shouldn''t.
FOIR — What Banks Actually Calculate
FOIR (Fixed Obligations to Income Ratio) is the metric used by every major Indian bank for loan eligibility. The calculation is straightforward:
FOIR = (All fixed monthly obligations + proposed new EMI) ÷ Gross monthly income × 100
"Fixed obligations" includes every contractual monthly outflow: home loan EMI, car loan EMI, personal loan EMI, credit card minimum payment (typically 5% of outstanding balance), education loan EMI, BNPL (buy-now-pay-later) installments, and any other formal credit obligation. Rent isn''t included by most banks (because rent isn''t a credit obligation), though some banks consider it informally.
Current sanctioning ceilings across major Indian lenders for salaried borrowers:
| Lender | Standard FOIR ceiling | Stretched ceiling (high earners) |
|---|---|---|
| State Bank of India | 50-55% | 60% (income >₹1.5L/month) |
| HDFC Bank | 50-55% | 60-65% (income >₹2L/month) |
| ICICI Bank | 50-55% | 60% (income >₹2L/month) |
| Axis Bank | 50-55% | 60% (income >₹2L/month) |
| LIC Housing Finance | 55-60% | 60% standard |
| PNB Housing Finance | 55-60% | 60% standard |
| Bank of Baroda | 45-50% | 55% (income >₹1.5L/month) |
| NBFCs (typical) | 50-55% | 60% (variable by lender) |
Self-employed borrowers face stricter limits — typically 40-50% — because income variability requires more buffer. Borrowers with incomes below ₹50,000 per month also face tighter ratios (40-45%) because absolute residual income matters more than the percentage at low income levels — leaving 50% of ₹30,000 means ₹15,000 to cover everything else, which isn''t enough for a family.
The maximum EMI a bank will sanction follows directly from the FOIR ceiling:
Maximum new EMI = (Gross monthly income × FOIR ceiling) − Existing EMIs
For someone earning ₹1 lakh gross with no existing EMIs and a 50% FOIR ceiling, the maximum new home loan EMI sanction would be ₹50,000 — translating to roughly ₹58-62 lakh of home loan principal at current rates and tenures. The same person with a ₹10,000 car loan EMI would see their maximum new EMI capacity drop to ₹40,000.
The Planner''s 40% Rule — and the Math Behind It
The 40% guideline isn''t arbitrary. It''s the EMI level that leaves room for everything else a working household needs to do with its money — save for retirement, save for shorter-term goals, build an emergency fund, pay for insurance and essentials, and have some discretionary spending. Once total EMI crosses 40% of take-home income, one or more of these categories starts getting squeezed.
The standard category split a financial planner targets for a middle-class household:
| Category | Target % of take-home | Why this matters |
|---|---|---|
| Long-term savings (PF/NPS/SIP) | 20-25% | Drives retirement corpus; lower than 20% means falling short of goals |
| Essential expenses | 25-30% | Food, utilities, transport, household; non-discretionary |
| Insurance + health | 3-5% | Term + health insurance premiums |
| Buffer / sinking funds | 5-10% | Annual expenses (insurance renewals, school fees), shocks |
| Lifestyle / discretionary | 10-15% | Dining, entertainment, subscriptions, hobbies |
| EMI capacity | 30-40% | The residual after everything else is properly allocated |
The 40% ceiling pops out of this allocation. With 20% savings, 25% essentials, 4% insurance, 7% buffer, 10% lifestyle — the budget sums to 66%, leaving 34% for EMI. Allow some lifestyle flexibility and savings can come down marginally to 20% floor, opening 40% for EMI. Go beyond 40% EMI and something else has to give — usually savings or buffer, both of which have long-term consequences.
Three Budget Breakdowns: 30%, 40%, 50% EMI
To make this concrete, here are three realistic monthly budget scenarios for a household earning ₹1,20,000 take-home per month (representative of a mid-career salaried professional at ₹15-17 lakh gross annual income):
| Category | 30% EMI scenario | 40% EMI scenario | 50% EMI scenario |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total EMIs | ₹36,000 (30%) | ₹48,000 (40%) | ₹60,000 (50%) |
| Long-term savings | ₹30,000 (25%) | ₹24,000 (20%) | ₹12,000 (10%) |
| Essentials | ₹30,000 (25%) | ₹26,400 (22%) | ₹26,400 (22%) |
| Insurance + health | ₹4,800 (4%) | ₹4,800 (4%) | ₹4,800 (4%) |
| Lifestyle | ₹15,600 (13%) | ₹12,000 (10%) | ₹12,000 (10%) |
| Buffer / sinking funds | ₹3,600 (3%) | ₹4,800 (4%) | ₹4,800 (4%) |
| Total | ₹1,20,000 | ₹1,20,000 | ₹1,20,000 |
| Verdict | Comfortable | Tight but workable | Stressed |
The middle scenario — 40% EMI — is what most middle-class urban households actually look like once they take on a mortgage in Bengaluru, Pune, Hyderabad, or Mumbai. It works, but with little slack. A job change with even a 10% salary cut, or a major expense (root canal, child''s admission deposit, parent''s medical), can push the budget out of balance — typically by raiding the buffer or skipping a month''s SIP.
The 50% scenario is where the system starts breaking. Long-term savings drop to 10%, which over a 25-year career produces a meaningfully smaller retirement corpus. The buffer at ₹4,800 doesn''t absorb anything material. Lifestyle compression at 10% feels punitive for a salary level that should support some comfort. And there''s zero room for income shocks. Households at 50% EMI typically respond to any disruption by adding more debt — credit cards, personal loans — which raises the EMI burden further and tightens the spiral.
The 30% scenario is the comfortable one. Savings at 25% genuinely compounds wealth, buffer at 3% (though small in percentage, it''s still ₹3,600 — meaningful month-to-month), lifestyle at 13% allows reasonable enjoyment without guilt. This is the EMI level most planners would push back to once they understand the full goal picture.
The Wealth Opportunity Cost
The EMI decision doesn''t just affect today''s budget — it shapes long-term wealth dramatically. The savings rate that results from each EMI scenario, compounded at 12% over 25 years (the long-term Indian equity CAGR):
| EMI scenario | Monthly savings | 25-year corpus at 12% CAGR |
|---|---|---|
| 30% EMI | ₹30,000 | ₹5.69 crore |
| 40% EMI | ₹24,000 | ₹4.55 crore |
| 50% EMI | ₹12,000 | ₹2.28 crore |
The difference between the 30% scenario and the 50% scenario over 25 years is ₹3.4 crore. The high-EMI investor isn''t just stressed during the working years — they also retire with less than half the corpus of the lower-EMI investor. The same gross income, the same household, the same career length — but the long-term wealth difference is enormous, driven entirely by the EMI decision made at the start of the homeowning years.
This is the framing most articles miss when they parrot "you can afford 50% EMI." Yes, you can pay it. The question is whether you should — and what you''re giving up to do so.
The Hidden EMI Burden
When most people talk about EMI, they mean the home loan. The bank''s FOIR calculation, however, includes every formal credit obligation. Understanding all the components prevents nasty surprises at loan application time and clarifies your true monthly fixed obligations:
- Home loan EMI — the largest single item for most households
- Car loan EMI — typically 5-7 year tenure, ₹15-50K monthly
- Personal loan EMI — typically 2-5 year tenure, ₹5-30K monthly for typical balances
- Education loan EMI — typically starting at the end of moratorium, ₹10-50K monthly depending on quantum
- Credit card minimum due — 5% of outstanding balance, included in FOIR even if you pay full amount
- BNPL installments — Buy Now Pay Later schemes (Simpl, LazyPay, ZestMoney, Amazon Pay Later) are now showing up on credit bureaus and counted in FOIR
- Consumer durable EMIs — phone EMI, laptop EMI, appliance EMIs from no-cost EMI schemes
- Co-borrower obligations — if you''ve co-signed a loan for a parent or sibling, that EMI counts as yours for FOIR
Add all of these up before considering a new home loan. Many would-be home loan applicants are surprised when their FOIR comes in higher than expected because of credit card minimums and consumer durable EMIs they''d forgotten counted. The bank''s database pulls everything from your CIBIL/Experian report, including obligations you may have personally written off.
From a planner''s perspective, the 40% rule applies to all EMIs combined — not just the home loan. If you''re carrying a ₹10,000 car loan EMI and ₹5,000 of credit card revolve, your home loan EMI should target around ₹25,000 (₹15,000 already used) to stay within 40% of a ₹1 lakh take-home.
Income Level Sensitivity
The same EMI percentage produces very different financial realities at different income levels. This is the most under-appreciated nuance in the 40% conversation.
| Take-home income | 30% EMI | Residual after EMI | What that residual covers |
|---|---|---|---|
| ₹40,000 | ₹12,000 | ₹28,000 | Tight even on bare essentials; little room for savings beyond PF |
| ₹80,000 | ₹24,000 | ₹56,000 | Manageable; meets minimum 20% savings target with discipline |
| ₹1,20,000 | ₹36,000 | ₹84,000 | Comfortable; meets 25% savings with room for lifestyle |
| ₹2,00,000 | ₹60,000 | ₹1,40,000 | Genuinely comfortable; supports 30%+ savings and good lifestyle |
| ₹5,00,000 | ₹1,50,000 | ₹3,50,000 | Very comfortable; could carry 40-45% EMI without strain |
At ₹40,000 take-home, even 30% EMI leaves only ₹28,000 — which for a household covering rent (if not yet homeowner), food, transport, and basic essentials in a metro is genuinely tight, with no room for material savings. For low-income households, the practical EMI ceiling is closer to 25%, not 30%.
At ₹5 lakh take-home, by contrast, 40% EMI leaves ₹3 lakh — comfortably covering all expense categories with substantial savings still going to wealth-building. High earners can defensibly carry 45-50% EMI without long-term consequences, simply because the absolute residual is large enough that percentage allocation matters less than absolute amounts.
The practical principle: the 40% rule is a guideline, not a law. Higher-income households can flex upward; lower-income households should flex downward. The right test is residual income — what''s left after EMI, mandatory savings, and essentials? — not the EMI percentage in isolation.
When EMI Burden Starts Breaking Lives
Beyond the budget math, there''s a psychological and operational threshold above which high EMI burden produces specific behaviours and outcomes:
50%+ EMI on take-home for sustained periods tends to produce: (a) regular credit card balance carry — using the card to cover monthly gaps, then paying interest on it; (b) skipped SIPs during pinch months, eroding the long-term plan; (c) deferred essential expenses (health checkups, vehicle servicing) that compound into larger problems later; (d) declined social and family obligations because the discretionary budget can''t flex; (e) significant relationship stress as the household runs constantly close to the edge.
60%+ EMI is genuinely dangerous. Any income disruption — a job change with even a brief gap, a major medical event, a parent''s sudden expense — typically triggers default risk. Banks describe this segment as "stressed" in their portfolio classifications, and it shows up in higher default rates and more frequent restructuring requests. If you''re at 60%+ EMI, you''re one shock away from a real problem.
The 40% ceiling exists precisely because it''s the level at which a household can absorb normal life events — a job change, a medical bill, a child''s admission expense, a parent''s emergency — without breaking the financial plan. Going substantially above 40% means trading long-term resilience for a larger house today.
How to Reduce EMI Burden
If your current EMI burden is above 40%, specific tactics to bring it down:
Extend home loan tenure. A ₹50 lakh home loan at 8.5% over 20 years has an EMI of ₹43,400; the same loan over 25 years has an EMI of ₹40,260 (₹3,140 lower); over 30 years it''s ₹38,450 (₹4,950 lower). The trade-off is more total interest paid over the loan life, but the monthly cash flow improves immediately. For households at high EMI burden, extending tenure is the simplest cash flow fix.
Refinance to a lower rate. If your existing home loan was issued at 9-10% and current rates are 8.5%, switching to another bank (or negotiating with your existing bank) can drop the EMI meaningfully. A ₹50 lakh loan over 20 years drops EMI by about ₹1,800 per 0.5% rate reduction.
Pay off small high-cost loans first. Personal loans at 13-18% and credit card balances at 36-42% should be cleared before considering new debt. Even paying minimum on a ₹2 lakh credit card revolving balance costs ₹6,000-7,000 a month in minimum payment plus eats into FOIR. Aggressive elimination of these creates room for productive borrowing later.
Prepay aggressively in the early years of a home loan. Prepaying ₹2-3 lakh in years 1-3 of a 20-year home loan dramatically reduces the total interest and shortens the tenure. The strategy: keep EMI fixed (don''t reduce it) but prepay lump sums whenever bonuses or windfalls arrive. This compresses the loan into the original cash-flow envelope.
Postpone the next big-ticket loan. If you''re already at 35-40% EMI on a home loan, postponing a car loan or major personal loan by 12-18 months until the home loan has aged (and the principal reduced) preserves long-term financial flexibility.
Buy a smaller property. The most powerful (and least popular) advice. A ₹60 lakh property in a B-tier location with a 25-year EMI of ₹48,000 leaves more room for everything else than an ₹80 lakh property in an A-tier location with a 30-year EMI of ₹62,000. Real-estate-as-status-good thinking pushes households to over-extend; the financial-planning view is that "right-sized" buying preserves life flexibility.
Common Mistakes
Treating the bank''s sanctioned ceiling as the right number. If a bank offers you a ₹75 lakh loan, you don''t have to take ₹75 lakh. The sanction is the maximum the bank is willing to give; the right amount is what fits within 40% EMI of your take-home, not the bank''s upper bound.
Forgetting rent in the FOIR-equivalent calculation. If you''re a renter applying for a home loan in a different city, your rent obligation doesn''t go away — it just changes form. The total of (existing rent that will continue + proposed home EMI) should still respect the 40% rule.
Underestimating the credit card minimum-due drag. A ₹3 lakh revolving credit card balance shows up as ₹15,000 of "EMI" in the bank''s FOIR (5% of outstanding). For households carrying significant credit card balances, paying these down before a home loan application is one of the highest-leverage actions.
Buying a car immediately after the home loan. The "now that the big loan is done, we can finance the car" instinct is one of the most consistent ways middle-class households end up at 50%+ EMI burden. Wait at least 2-3 years; let the home loan age and let your income grow before stacking another major EMI.
Trusting the EMI-to-gross-income calculation when planning. Banks measure on gross; tax and statutory deductions eat 20-25%. A 40% EMI on gross income is 50%+ EMI on take-home, which is the stressed zone. Always do your planning math on take-home.
Believing variable pay reliably reduces EMI burden. Banks often consider 50% of variable pay (bonus, RSU) for FOIR. Households often assume 100%. Plan EMI burden against the fixed part of your salary alone — variable pay should accelerate savings or prepayment, not make EMI affordable.
Frequently Asked Questions
What percentage of salary should go to EMI in India?
The financial planning consensus is 40% of take-home income as the maximum for all EMIs combined — home loan, car loan, personal loan, credit card minimums, BNPL, everything. Banks routinely sanction up to 50-55% of gross monthly income (sometimes 60% for high earners), but that''s the maximum they''ll allow, not the maximum that''s financially healthy. At 30-35% EMI burden, a household can comfortably save 20-25% for long-term goals and maintain buffer for surprises; at 50% EMI burden, savings drop to 10% and the household becomes fragile to income shocks. The right ceiling depends on income level: 40% is comfortable at ₹2L+ take-home but punishing at ₹40K because absolute residual income matters more than the percentage at low incomes.
What is FOIR and how do banks calculate it?
FOIR (Fixed Obligations to Income Ratio) is the metric Indian banks use for home loan and personal loan eligibility. The formula is (all fixed monthly obligations + proposed new EMI) divided by gross monthly income. "Fixed obligations" includes every contractual monthly outflow: home loan EMI, car loan EMI, personal loan EMI, credit card minimum payment (5% of outstanding), education loan EMI, BNPL installments, consumer durable EMIs, and any other formal credit obligation pulled from your CIBIL report. Rent isn''t included by most banks. Major Indian banks like SBI, HDFC, ICICI, and Axis sanction loans up to 50-55% FOIR, stretching to 60% for very high earners; LIC Housing and PNB Housing go up to 60% standard. Self-employed borrowers face stricter ceilings of 40-50% because income variability requires more buffer.
Is 50% EMI to income ratio safe?
It''s safe from the bank''s perspective — they''ll happily sanction at this level, and statistically you''re unlikely to default. It''s not safe from a long-term financial-planning perspective. At 50% EMI, your savings rate drops to roughly 10% of take-home, which over a 25-year career produces dramatically less wealth than a 25% savings rate at 30% EMI burden. The numbers: at ₹1.2L take-home, 30% EMI / 25% savings produces a ₹5.69 crore corpus over 25 years; 50% EMI / 10% savings produces only ₹2.28 crore — a ₹3.4 crore difference. The 50% level also leaves no buffer for shocks — a job change, medical bill, or unexpected expense forces credit card revolve or skipped SIPs, both of which compound the problem. Use 50% as a stress test; aim for 40% as the actual ceiling.
Does FOIR include rent?
No, most Indian banks don''t include rent in their FOIR calculation because rent isn''t a formal credit obligation reported to CIBIL. This creates an important asymmetry — a renter applying for a home loan might have a "low FOIR" (just home loan EMI) while still committing 60-70% of their take-home income to housing if both rent and EMI continue during the construction phase. From a financial planning view, treat rent as if it''s EMI for budget purposes — your true housing burden is rent + EMI during transition periods. Some banks informally consider rent for sanity-checking high-FOIR cases, but it doesn''t appear in the formal FOIR formula. The honest test: what percentage of take-home is committed to housing in all its forms (rent + EMI + maintenance + property tax)?
How much home loan can I get on ₹50,000 salary?
The bank''s math at 50% FOIR ceiling: maximum new EMI = ₹50,000 × 50% = ₹25,000 (assuming no existing EMIs). At current home loan rates of 8.5% over 25 years, ₹25,000 EMI supports a loan principal of approximately ₹31 lakh. With a 20-year tenure (more conservative), the principal is approximately ₹28 lakh. Many banks are stricter at lower income levels — applying 40-45% FOIR ceilings — which would drop the eligible EMI to ₹20,000-22,500 and principal to ₹25-28 lakh. The planner''s view differs: at ₹50,000 take-home, 30% EMI = ₹15,000, supporting a loan of approximately ₹19 lakh — this leaves room for savings and essentials. The bank''s ₹31 lakh sanction is the maximum; the planner''s ₹19 lakh is the recommendation. Choose the planner number unless you have specific reasons to flex upward.
Should EMI be calculated on gross or take-home income?
Banks calculate FOIR on gross income (before tax and statutory deductions); financial planners calculate the 40% rule on take-home (after tax and deductions). The bank''s gross-income method allows higher absolute EMIs because the denominator is larger. The planner''s take-home method is more conservative and reflects what you actually have available to spend. Always plan your EMI commitment using take-home income — this is what genuinely funds your monthly budget. If a bank''s FOIR calculation on gross income produces a much higher number than your 40% rule on take-home suggests, the bank''s number is the maximum they''ll allow, not the maximum that''s right for you. For a ₹1 lakh gross / ₹75K take-home professional, the bank''s 50% FOIR on gross says ₹50K EMI; the planner''s 40% rule on take-home says ₹30K EMI — a big difference, with the planner number being the financially healthier ceiling.
Does credit card balance affect home loan eligibility?
Yes, materially. Banks include the credit card minimum due (5% of total outstanding balance) in the FOIR calculation, even if you actually pay the full amount each month. A ₹3 lakh credit card revolving balance shows up as ₹15,000 of "EMI" in the bank''s view — reducing your eligible new home loan EMI by ₹15,000, which at current rates and tenures reduces eligible principal by approximately ₹18-20 lakh. Beyond the FOIR impact, high credit card balances also lower your CIBIL score (utilisation ratios above 30-40% start reducing scores) and signal cash-flow stress to the bank''s underwriter. Before applying for a home loan, aggressively pay down credit card revolving balances to under 30% of the credit limit — this both improves your FOIR room and lifts your CIBIL score, often translating to better offered interest rates as well.
Sources and Further Reading
This article references the Fixed Obligations to Income Ratio (FOIR) methodology used by major Indian banks for home loan eligibility, current FY 2026-27 home loan interest rates from public-sector and private lenders, RBI regulatory guidelines on retail credit assessment, and standard household budgeting frameworks used by SEBI-registered financial planners.
- Reserve Bank of India — retail credit regulations, repo rate decisions affecting home loan rates
- CIBIL (TransUnion) — credit bureau, source of bank FOIR data and credit score
- SEBI — investor protection guidelines and registered financial planner framework
- National Housing Bank — regulator for housing finance companies (LIC Housing, PNB Housing)
Last verified: 7 June 2026. Home loan rates and FOIR sanctioning ceilings reflect FY 2026-27 norms across major Indian banks. The 40% planner rule is well-established in financial planning practice and consistent with SEBI-registered investment adviser frameworks. Specific bank policies and FOIR ceilings may vary by branch, by borrower segment, and by current bank credit appetite.