Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Question, do people earning less than $20K/year even pay federal income taxes? Doubtful. So maybe that's why this deduction isn't "benefiting" them. They have to actually pay taxes to get a deduction on those taxes.
Indeed, they don't benefit from these crooked little mechanisms to reduce a taxpayer's AGI due to interest he paid on the mortgage of his vacation house.
Quote:
And since when is earning $100K/year considered "wealthy"?
I never defined what income level constitutes wealthy.
I said that this deduction benefits the wealthiest Americans, which are the homeowners. It is poor public policy to subsidize the wealthiest.
Are you suggesting that renters are wealthier than homeowners? I think that's absurd.
Quote:
And I flat out disagree that lower income homeowners are getting hit with higher home prices because the deduction exists. That is a crock of crap. People don't base purchase prices of home on the amount of mortgage deduction they'll get back.
Purchase prices are based on what a buyer can afford. The mortgage interest deduction affects what a buyer can afford. Do I need to connect the dots?
I don't care. And neither do most Americans. The rate of taxation doesn't even register in surveys ranking national priorities.
Clinton balanced the budget until the biggest moron ever came along and decided to cut tax in the middle of a needless war you supported and he started.
Most Americans care about spending and our of control government. The taxes are being discussed as a way to ease that, but history shows that isn't likely - my point.
What does Clinton have to do with the current discussions of tax policy?
Regarding the war, I stood by the Democrats in their support.
Indeed, they don't benefit from these crooked little mechanisms to reduce a taxpayer's AGI due to interest he paid on the mortgage of his vacation house.
Well why complain? If you (general) don't pay taxes anyhow, this will not effect you either way. How are the poor subsidizing anything if they aren't paying taxes to begin with? Your argument is based on a false premise. The only reason the poor aren't benefiting in huge numbers is because they aren't paying to begin with. Lordy, so simple a concept yet so difficult for some to comprehend.
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi
I never defined what income level constitutes wealthy.
I said that this deduction benefits the wealthiest Americans, which are the homeowners. It is poor public policy to subsidize the wealthiest.
And per the article, 80% of those earning $100K/year are taking advantage of the deduction. Connect the dots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi
Are you suggesting that renters are wealthier than homeowners? I think that's absurd.
Who said that? You're absurd for even making that statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi
Purchase prices are based on what a buyer can afford. The mortgage interest deduction affects what a buyer can afford. Do I need to connect the dots?
Apparently YOU need to go back and reread what the article is purporting. I do not buy into the premise that home prices are artificially inflated because the home mortgage deduction exists, which is what the article states. Nor would I think to myself, wow I can afford an even more expensive home because I can write off the interest on my mortgage. Maybe other people feel that way and perhaps those are the people who have lost their homes to foreclosure? Dunno, but the interest deduction does not significantly effect the prices of homes.
Honestly, all I get out of reading your posts is your jealousy of "the rich".
"Brookings Institution senior fellow Alan Mallach stirred the controversy during an October lecture at University of Nevada, Las Vegas, when he supported the commission's plan to reduce, or even eliminate, the tax deduction for homeowners.
He said lower-income households typically aren't able to take advantage of mortgage deductions and end up subsidizing wealthier people who have larger, more expensive homes. It's also a myth that the tax deduction encourages renters to buy homes."
I'm all for it.
If you eliminate the tax deduction, then you force consumers to at least attempt to act somewhat responsibly.
One of the things that will happen here is that people will be forced to make a down-payment in the 35%+ range just like their grandparents and great-grandparents and great-great-grandparents voluntarily did because they were much smarter and knew it was the right thing to do.
And no, I don't see why I should be forced to subsidize someone else's life-style by granting them a tax exemption.
I'm for eliminating the mortgage deduction since it's really just a subsidy for banks. That said, we most certainly should not be cutting taxes by 10 percentage points when we're already facing a huge deficit. America needs to come back to reality and actually pay for the government services we all use and demand. No more free rides.
Killing it is a great idea, but it is unlikely to happen in our current economic state.
Anyone who attacks the mortgage interest deduction will be branded as a supporter of "higher taxes".
Plus the National Realtors Association, the Homebuilders, and the home mortgage industry are behind this thing 100%, and they throw big money around.
Well ????? It would be an increase in taxes
Man, I tell you ... it's tough to be a sheep in this country with so many sheep volunteering to be herders .. Jesus Christ.
That's right, let's tax us more .... err uh ... I mean ... "them" ..... you ARE THEM
I'm beginning to look forward to the fulfillment of the Georgia Guide Stone's goal .... even if I'm part of the unlucky 80% ... because I really don't see how I can stand much more of this asylum being ruled by the insane.
The bankers have stolen 12 Trillion ... and you think raising taxes on home owners .... in the midst of a financial meltdown is a good idea?
"Brookings Institution senior fellow Alan Mallach stirred the controversy during an October lecture at University of Nevada, Las Vegas, when he supported the commission's plan to reduce, or even eliminate, the tax deduction for homeowners.
He said lower-income households typically aren't able to take advantage of mortgage deductions and end up subsidizing wealthier people who have larger, more expensive homes. It's also a myth that the tax deduction encourages renters to buy homes."
I'm all for it if eliminating mortgage interest will give a simpler tax. But it is not the case. By eliminating mortgage-interest will do nothing except hurting home owner. There is only a handful of tax deductible individual get, now they want to take it away?
Why is every time when someone want to take/give a benefit, there is always a rich vs poor debate? It has nothing to do with money. For all those who support, why don't you ask yourself this question. If they can give and take this benefit from another person, how do I benefit? The answer most like is, you don't get any benefit. Government get all the benefit. If this is the case, why do you even support it?
While the straight dollar to dollar comparison seems to "help" the wealthiest homeowner the most with the mortgage tax deduction, it is ultimately the middle class homeowner that would be damaged the most by eliminating this deduction. For the wealthiest, this increase in taxes would be offset by other deductions (i.e. charitable giving, etc) but for the middle class homeowner, it would amount to a tax increase and nothing more since disposable income is much smaller at this income range. In addition, I doubt this could have a beneficial effect upon the already ailing housing market.
I, personally, would rent vice owning without a deduction. Having a deduction is not the only reason I own but then I could see little benefit to actually owning without a deduction since my "costs" would greatly outweigh my benefits. With renting, homeowner's insurance would be replaced with less expensive renter's insurance, and maintenance costs such as a new roof, a/c, etc would be eliminated. Now, I could not change the color of my walls if renting - um - big deal. So, yes, for me, the deduction does have a pretty big effect on my owning a home vice renting one.
I can support the elimination of the mortgage interest deduction, under the condition that state and local property taxes paid are allowed as a tax credit on federal income tax. Or if property taxes are eliminated and state and local revenuse are raised by income and sales taxes only. We have an blatently unfair situation where renters are allowed to vote on issues driving property taxes, while they pay none (directly).
Also, eliminate the "earned income tax credit", tax day should not be a welfare payment to a large number of people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
