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.
As someone who works in real estate I can tell you that getting rid of the "mortgage interest tax deduction" will kill the the housing market along with my lively hood. In all honesty I think bankers who lend to homeowners would be more opposed to this idea than actual borrowers.
Bankers & lenders get all of their "interest" money or their "profits" on mortgages in the first few years on a loan.
I have known clients who have done FHA loans with 3% down of the purchase price & who were more responsible than somebody putting 20% down!
That is a bit over the top. First, if someone can't afford a home without the mortgage deduction, they are living in a home they can't afford and living beyond their means.
My mother owned a home and she was low to middle class. My grandfather owned his home, 2 years after left home not wearing shoes. He was not rich.
The housing market isn't going to get harder for those who save and plan. It will simply be harder for those who don't. That is all that will change. In fact, it was far easier to buy a home in the past than it is today where they made access to loans available to anyone without strict requirements. When I say easier, I am talking about buying a home one can afford because a lot of people out there in homes really can't afford them unless there is a bunch of loopholes for them to jump through to keep them. That needs to stop so people come back to reality, live within their means, and appreciate the natural value of things. When that happens, homes will be available to anyone who puts some effort in to get one. What is more, they will actually be able to "own" their home within a reasonable amount of time, unlike today where the idea of owning a home is really just an imaginary concept to make people feel better while they pay on huge mortgages which stretch them to their limits.
Why should taxpayers subsidize home ownership? And how is it fair to renters or those who have paid off their mortgages that they get no break? If you need a tax beak to be able to afford a home then maybe you should not be buying one. But the timing sucks. You don't end a tax break in a recession. You end it during a boom when the impact will be much less.
Imagine a flat tax rate of 20 percent. Now imagine a tax deduction that allows half "A" of the taxpayers to "just not pay tax" on half their income.
Now half the taxpayers are paying 20 percent and half are paying 10 percent.
The government is then taking 5 percent from "B" taxpayers and giving it to "A" taxpayers.
No they arent since the A taxpayers are paying B tax payers for using their properties, (i.e. renters), this allows the rent to not be as high as they could be.
Do renters somehow think they are exempt from paying the tax? Who the heckdo you think pays it? The cost is passed onto the tenants of course.
Why should taxpayers subsidize home ownership? And how is it fair to renters or those who have paid off their mortgages that they get no break? If you need a tax beak to be able to afford a home then maybe you should not be buying one. But the timing sucks. You don't end a tax break in a recession. You end it during a boom when the impact will be much less.
Renters get a break, they dont have the cost passed onto them. And taxpayers arent subsidizing home ownership. Heck, I support them getting rid of the deduction as well, but please attempt to be accurate.
renters pay market prices, regardless of what their landlord's cost basis is.
market prices are dictated by overall costs Do you really think we have a nation of landlords all subsidizing renters by not charging enough rent to cover their expenses?
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi
furthermore, not all landlords get the mortgage interest deduction.
Landlords who are in the business of landlording get it, its one of the best reasons for investing.
What I find ironic, is the very same individuals who had no problem with the first time home buyer GRANTS of $8K, given to home buyers, are now moaning and groaning because some home buyer can claim a $1k expense a year, which would result in a few hundred dollar tax cut.
Still scratching my head over that
giving people money = good
allowing people to keep their money = bad.
A tax credit and a deduction are different things.
I think we should end both also. But a child tax credit doesn't encourage you to have children
Is that a joke? Government handouts most certainly DO encourage breeding. The birth rate of those on public assistance is 3 times that of those NOT on public assistance. The more kids they have, the more government freebies they get.
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.
Do you really think we have a nation of landlords all subsidizing renters by not charging enough rent to cover their expenses?