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.
Some one told me that they had heard there was a plan floated to tax people as income on the value of their homes if owned outright or if they owed less on it than it was worth. I said that I couldn't believe that idea would float. Talk about punishing people who are doing the right thing financially!
yeah right. I freaking dare the government to try that one. property taxes are already bad enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marysally
Some one told me that they had heard there was a plan floated to tax people as income on the value of their homes if owned outright or if they owed less on it than it was worth. I said that I couldn't believe that idea would float. Talk about punishing people who are doing the right thing financially!
The idea apparently was that if your payment was less than you would pay if you rented the house, the difference would be considered income. Or if you owned outright, the total amount you would pay if you were renting the house would be considered income.
The idea apparently was that if your payment was less than you would pay if you rented the house, the difference would be considered income. Or if you owned outright, the total amount you would pay if you were renting the house would be considered income.
That's a little hard to imagine! Do you have a supporting link?
The idea apparently was that if your payment was less than you would pay if you rented the house, the difference would be considered income. Or if you owned outright, the total amount you would pay if you were renting the house would be considered income.
Yes, I heard the Democrats floated that as a trial balloon back in 94, just prior to the Gingrich Revolution. It's the concept of 'imputed income'. And you can see what happened during that election cycle.
Let's say you own a home worth $250,000. Your payments on that home are about $2,000 a month. The government uses census data (there is a reason they ask all of those extra questions) to figure out what a $250,000 home in your neighborhood would rent for. Let's say it would rent for $3000 a month. This means that you could rent your home for $1000 a month more than your payments. But you're not renting your home, you're living in it. You must know that this just isn't fair to people who have to rent homes. They don't get the tax deductions you get. They don't own their own homes because, unlike you, they haven't, as Dickie Gephardt likes to phrase it, "won life's lottery."
Well, since you're so rich and since you own your own home, the Democrats would really like to get a little more money from you, to spend on those poor renters and people who aren't as "fortunate" as you are. This would all be in exchange of their votes, of course.
The idea apparently was that if your payment was less than you would pay if you rented the house, the difference would be considered income. Or if you owned outright, the total amount you would pay if you were renting the house would be considered income.
Screw that.. what's the point of owning a home then? Once you've worked hard enough to pay off a house, you shouldn't be punished for it. There's no way a law like this would fly..
Yes, I heard the Democrats floated that as a trial balloon back in 94, just prior to the Gingrich Revolution. It's the concept of 'imputed income'. And you can see what happened during that election cycle.
Let's say you own a home worth $250,000. Your payments on that home are about $2,000 a month. The government uses census data (there is a reason they ask all of those extra questions) to figure out what a $250,000 home in your neighborhood would rent for. Let's say it would rent for $3000 a month. This means that you could rent your home for $1000 a month more than your payments. But you're not renting your home, you're living in it. You must know that this just isn't fair to people who have to rent homes. They don't get the tax deductions you get. They don't own their own homes because, unlike you, they haven't, as Dickie Gephardt likes to phrase it, "won life's lottery."
Well, since you're so rich and since you own your own home, the Democrats would really like to get a little more money from you, to spend on those poor renters and people who aren't as "fortunate" as you are. This would all be in exchange of their votes, of course.
That is the time we should have another revolution.. We busted our rears to pay cash for our retiremet home and I can hear the other seniors screaming in the streets if that takes place. Figures it came from the democratic side of the street. Helping the litte guy, yeah, sure.
I'll just rent my paid for home to myself for 10,000 a month.
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.
